tihravy  of  Che  trheolo^icd  ^tminavy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 
PRESENTED  BY 

the  Estate  of 
Harold  McAfee  Robinson,  D.D* 


BR  121  .M3256  c.2 
Mackintosh,  H.  R.  1870-1936 
The  originality  of  the 
Christian  message 


^ 


/ 


THE  ORIGINALITY  OF  THE 
CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


STUDIES  IN  THEOLOGY 


Christianity  and  Ethics. 

By  Archibald  B.  D.  Alexander,  M.A.,  D.D. 
The  Environment  of  Early  Christianity. 

By  S.  Angus,  M.A.,  Ph.D. 
History  of  the  Study  of  Theology.    Vol.  I. 

"  "  "  VoLn. 

By  Dr.  C.  A.  Briggs. 
The  Christian  Hope. 

By  W.  Adams  Brown,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
Christianity  and  Social  Questions. 

By  William  Cunningham,  F.B.A.,  D.D.,  D.Sc 
The  Justification  of  God. 

By  Rev.  P.  T.  Forsyth. 
Christian  Apologetics. 

By  Rev.  A.  E.  Garvie. 
A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament. 

By  George  Buchanan  Gray,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 
Gospel  Origins. 

By  William  West  Holdsworth,  M.A. 
Faith  and  Its  Psychology. 

By  William  R.  Inge,  D.D. 
Christianity  and  Sin. 

By  Robert  Mackintosh,  D.D. 
Protestant  Thought  Before  Kant. 

By  A.  C.  McGiFFERT,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
The  Theology  of  the  Gospels. 

By  James  Moffatt,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 

History  of  Christian  Thought  Since  Kant. 

By  Edward  Caldwell  Moore,  D.D. 
The  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement. 

By  J.  K.  MozLEv,,  M.A. 
Revelation  and  Inspiration. 

By  James  Orr,  D.D. 
A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament 

By  Arthur  Samuel  Peake,  D.D. 
Philosophy  and  Religion. 

By  Hastings  Rashdall,  D.Litt.  CQxon.),  D.CLi 
(Durham),  F.B.A. 
The  Holv  Spirit. 

ByT.  Rees,  M.A.  (Lend.),  B.A.  (Oxon.). 
The  Religious  Ideas  of  the  Old  Testament. 

By  H.  Wheeler  Robin?on,  M.A. 
The  Text  and  Canon  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Alexander  Souter,  D.Litt. 
Christian  Thought  to  the  Reformation. 

By  Herbert  B.  Workman,  D.Litt. 
The  Theology  of  the  Epistles. 

By  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  D.Sc,  D.D. 
The  Pharisees  and  Jesus. 

By  A.  T.  Robertson,  A.M.,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
The  Originality  of  the  Christian  Message. 

By  H.  R.  IVlACKiNxosH,  D.D.,  D.Phil. 


THE  ORIGINALITY  OP  THE 
CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE      -^ 


BY 
H.  R.  MACKINTOSH,  D.D.,  D.Phil. 

PROFESSOR   OF  SYSTEMATIC   THEOLOGY,    NEW    COLLEGE,   EDINBURGH 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1920 


First  Published  1920 


IN   PIAM   MEMORIAM 

DANIEL  FORBES 
MARGARET  ROSS 

(in  qtjibus  manlfestata  est  imago  christi) 

olim  patris  mlhi  pabvo  atque  matris 

per  cur  am  suam  et  amorem 

si  non  natura 


PREFACE 

The  lectures  printed  in  this  volume  were  delivered,  on  the 
Haskell  Foundation,  in  the  Theological  Seminary  of 
OberHn  College,  Ohio,  in  March  of  this  year.  No  change 
has  been  made  in  the  spoken  argument  except  to  supply 
some  portions  then  omitted  for  lack  of  time. 

To  the  President  and  Theological  Faculty  of  OberUn 
College  I  am  under  a  twofold  debt  of  gratitude.  In  the 
first  place,  when  in  1915  they  honoured  me  with  an  invita- 
tion to  be  a  Haskell  Lecturer  and  suggested  for  topic 
*  The  OriginaUty  of  the  Christian  Message,'  they  opened 
up  for  me  afresh  a  singularly  fruitful  field  of  inquiry,  the 
captivating  interest  of  which  went  to  alleviate  the  distrac- 
tions and  anxieties  arising  out  of  the  Great  War.  I  regret 
exceedingly  that  an  engagement  taken  for  1917  had  for 
obvious  reasons  to  be  postponed  to  1920. 

And  secondly,  I  cannot  easily  forget  the  never-failing 
kindness  shown  me  during  my  stay  amongst  them,  or  the 
friendly  consideration  with  which  they  treated  different 
inquiries  and  proposals  sent  to  them,  from  time  to  time, 
in  these  last  five  years. 

My  colleague,  Professor  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  D.D.,  D.Sc., 
has  once  more  given  me  the  inspiring  aid  of  his  scholarly 
and  sympathetic  criticism,  by  reading  the  lectures  both  in 
manuscript  and  in  proof  and  by  recommending  many  im- 
provements of  thought  and  language.  The  Rev.  J.  H. 
Leckie,  D.D.,  in  addition  to  reading  critically  the  whole 
MS.,  assisted  me  from  the  stores  of  his  special  knowledge  to 
correct  the  balance  of  what  I  had  at  first  written  about 


viii         ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 

Philo  and  the  religious  ideas  of  Judaism.  To  these  friends 
I  owe  cordial  thanks  for  their  kind  help  and  valuable 
suggestions. 

It  is  my  hope  that  this  slight  book  may  stimulate  better 
men  to  undertake  the  detailed  treatment  of  a  subject  which 
has,  till  now,  suffered  a  curious  neglect.  The  imperfections 
of  the  study  now  offered,  the  reader  will  perhaps  be  willing 
to  excuse  on  the  principle  that  first  sketches  seldom  fail 
to  exhibit  grave  defects  of  insight  and  perspective.  No 
full  statement  of  Christian  Theology  viewed  in  the  Hght  of 
the  Comparative  Study  of  ReHgions  has  so  far  been  put 
forward.  And  yet  the  student  of  religious  thought  in  its 
historical  development  could  scarcely  find  a  more  rewarding 
theme  than  the  distinctive  contribution  of  the  Gospel  to 
the  finally  coherent  view  of  Faith  and  Duty. 


H.  E.  MACKINTOSH. 


New  Colleqh, 
Ebinbuboh,  April  1920L 


CONTENTS 

LECTURE  I 
THE  MEANING   AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY 

PAOB 

Novelty  and  Scope  of  Inquiry  ..,,,,,  1 

Definition  of  Christianity          ..••...  4 

Every  Living  Faith  Original 7 

Christianity  Continuous  with  the  Past 11 

The  Fulness  of  the  Times 15 

The  Great  Rival  Religions 19 

Christianity  and  Hebraism 21 

Christianity  Ever  New  through  Contact  with  Jesus          ,        .  24 

Scheme  of  Lectures 26 

LECTURE  II 
THE  CHRISTIAN   IDEA   OF  GOD 

The  Trinity 29 

Monotheism •        .  32 

The  Personality  of  God 34 

The  Divine  Fatherhood 38 

1.  Love 40 

2.  Holiness 42 

3.  Power 43 

The  Conception  of  Deification .45 

Old  Testament  Approaches 47 

Jesus'  Original  Revelation         .         .         .         .         ,         ,         .51 
Biblical  Faith  Rooted  in  History ,66 


ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


LECTURE  III 
THE  DIVINE   SAVING  ACTIVITY 

PAOB 

The  Cliristian  Idea  of  Creation  ....  .58 

Man 61 

Sin 63 

Individuality 64 

Providence 67 

Gt)d  in  History 73 

Christianity  Centred  in  Jesus 76 

Incarnation       .         .         .         . 80 

The  Dying  and  Rising  God 83 

Jesus  a  Suffering  Messiah 85 

The  Resurrection 87 

Free  Grace 89 

The  Christian  Brotherhood  of  Man .91 


LECTURE  IV 


REDEMPTION   AS  AN   EXPERIENCE 


Emancipation  from  the  World 

I.  The  Pathway  to  Redemption 
Legalism      .... 
Mysticism  and  the  Mysteries 
Intellectualism     . 

Christian  Penitence  and  Faith 

II.  The  Redeemed  Experience  . 
Union  with  God  or  Son&hip 
Advance  on  the  Old  Testament 
Immortality 


94 

98 

98 

102 

108 

110 
114 
114 
120 
122 


CONTENTS 


XI 


LECTURE  V 
THE  CHRISTIAN   KTHIC 

I.  The  Christian  Moral  Ideal 
Contrast  with  Judaism 
Contrast  with  Paganism     . 
Egoistic  and  Theocentric  Morality 
Forgiveness  of  Injaries 
Brotherhood       .... 

II.  The  Moral  Dynamic  of  Christianity 
A  Religious  Morality 
Its  Relation  to  Jesus 

III.  The  Moral  Success  of  Christianity 
Its  Unexhausted  Reserves 


FAOa 

127 
129 
131 
134 
137 
139 

141 
142 
149 

155 
158 


LECTURE  VI 
THE   ABSOLUTENESS   OF  CHRISTIANITY 

The  Progressiveness  of. the  Christian  Religion 
Is  an  Absolute  Religion  Possible  ?     . 
Buddhism  as  the  Final  Faith    . 
The  Absolute  Religion  as  Future 
Christianity  both  Final  and  Evolving 
The  Argument  of  Troeltsch 
Faith  alone  decides  the  Question 
Christianity  and  other  Religions 

Bibliography         .... 
Index  of  Subjects 
Index  of  Authors 
Biblical  Referkncbs    , 


162 
164 
166 
173 
175 
180 
187 
189 

193 
198 

200 
201 


THE   ORIGINALITY   OF  THE 
CHRISTIAN   MESSAGE 

LECTURE  I 

THE  MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY 

The  problem  to  be  discussed  in  the  following  course  of 
lectures  is  one  of  special  importance  and  timeliness.  Much 
less  attention  than  we  might  have  anticipated  has  been 
given  to  the  question  how  far  the  message  of  Christianity 
represents  a  forward  step  in  the  history  of  rehgious  faith. 
For  many  years  the  more  general  topic  of  the  indebtedness 
of  Christianity  to  other  reHgions  in  respect  of  worship, 
institutions,  and  poUty,  as  well  as  of  concepts  or  thought- 
forms,  has  been  the  subject  of  inquiry  by  the  scholars  of 
two  hemispheres  ;  but  the  aspect  of  the  case  which  most 
deeply  interests  the  theologian  as  such  has  so  far  suffered 
a  good  deal  of  neglect.  At  least  I  should  find  it  hard  to 
mention  any  volume  in  any  language  where  the  essential 
originahty  of  the  Christian  Gospel,  with  its  impUed  view  of 
God  and  the  worid,  has  been  treated  of  consecutively  or  in 
detail.  Isolated  articles  on  special  points  exist  in  plenty, 
but  a  systematic  handling  of  novel  elements  in  the  Christian 
creed  as  a  whole  is  still  lacking.  Yet  when  we  have  fixed, 
at  all  events  in  principle,  the  causal  or  genetic  relationships 
between  Christianity  and  pre-Christian  rehgions,  we  have 
no  choice  but  to  go  on  to  raise  the  further  question,  what 
features  of  Christian  behef  are  new,  and  not  merely  new 
but  so  intensely  charged  with  native  truth  and  power 
as  to  entitle  Christianity  to  displace  its  rivals.  It  is  a 
matter,  any  one  can  see,  of  crucial  moment  for  the  advocate 

A 


2        ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

of  foreign  missions.  '  The  nerve  of  missionary  endeavour,' 
it  has  been  said,  *  is  the  conviction  that  in  the  Christian 
revelation  there  is  something  distinctive  and  vital  which 
the  world  cannot  do  without.'  ^  This  conviction,  if  we 
hold  it,  not  merely  requires  to  be  justified  by  argument ; 
it  will  eventually  lead,  as  we  shall  find  before  the  close, 
to  an  inquiry  whether  and  in  what  sense  Christianity  can 
be  described  as  the  final  or  absolute  religion — not  only 
superior  to  all  forerunners  and  surviving  competitors, 
but  destined  for,  and  deserving  of,  permanent  sway  over 
the  best  human  life. 

The  point  of  view  from  which  I  shall  try  to  approach 
the  subject-matter  of  these  lectures  is,  let  me  repeat, 
that  of  the  theologian,  concerned  chiefly  with  the  meaning 
and  truth  of  beliefs.  I  do  not  feel  myself  able  to  con- 
tribute anything  to  the  scientific  History  of  Religions  ; 
all  I  can  claim  is  to  have  made  myself  acquainted  with 
the  work  of  some  of  the  best  students  in  that  field, 
only  reserving  the  right  to  exercise  upon  their  conclusions, 
where  they  assume  the  character  of  criticism  or  evaluation, 
the  power  of  private  judgment  granted  to  the  humblest 
of  us  all.  None  the  less  I  hope  that  the  discussion  may  be 
animated  by  the  historic  spirit.  In  some  degree  the  dif- 
ficulty of  this  ought  to  be  eased  by  the  fact  that  the  point 
of  departure  adopted  here,  as  well  as  the  standard  of 
reference  throughout,  is  the  Grospel  in  its  New  Testament 
or  classic  form.  All  the  world  knows  that  as  Christianity 
lived  on  in  time  it  modified  and  was  modified  by  environing 
influences,  and  it  would  be  a  very  rash  person  who  under- 
took to  decide  precisely  at  what  stage  these  exterior  forces 
oame  into  play.  Still,  in  the  words  of  Burke,  *  though 
no  man  can  draw  a  stroke  between  the  confines  of  day 
and  night,  yet  fight  and  darkness  are  upon  the  T^4iole 
tolerably  distinguishable '  ;  and  the  present  argument 
is  meant  to  bring  fresh  support  to  the  conviction  that  it  is 
not  fancy,  but  fact,  that  the  New  Testament  witness  to 

>  J.  H.  Oldham,  Th«  World  and  the  Gospel,  p.  26. 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY       3 

Christ  conveys  a  religious  message  which  is  in  a  class 
by  itself  and  cannot  be  derived  by  inference  or  combination 
from  the  ideas  of  any  other  faith  or  faiths.  How  far  this 
would  hold  good  for  the  Christianity  of,  say,  the  year  400, 
we  need  not  now  inquire. 

Looking,  then,  at  the  mass  of  religious  thought  and 
feeling  which  prevailed,  when  Christianity  began,  through- 
out the  ancient  world  from  the  Tiber  to  the  Euphrates, 
with  its  Jewish,  Hellenistic,  and  Oriental  streams  of 
tendency,  let  us  try  to  ascertain  to  what  extent  the  Gospel 
in  its  main  features  is  original,  and  what  is  the  prospect 
of  its  being  improved  upon.  It  is  not  antiquarian  detail 
or  systematised  theology  that  we  shall  have  in  view,  but 
the  Evangel  itself ;  the  Uving  substance  of  that  redeeming 
faith  which  moved  and  throbbed  in  the  great  souls  of  the 
first  Christian  generation  ;  in  short,  those  vital  forces 
that  made  our  rehgion  what  it  is,  and  had  in  them  from 
the  outset  a  prophecy  of  triumph. 

The  problem  thus  sketched  is,  I  need  hardly  say,  not  even 
relatively  novel.  Essentially  it  was  one  theme  of  the 
second-century  Apologists,  and  well-known  discussions  of 
it  abounded  in  the  eighteenth  century,  though  the  chief 
disputants  showed  very  httle  sense  for  history.  But  on 
the  modem  mind  it  bears  with  a  quite  pecuhar  sharpness 
of  impact.  The  scientific  Study  of  ReHgions,  which  has 
recently  made  giant  strides  and  has  proved  of  such  value 
to  theology  in  its  historic  and  apologetic  branches  as 
permanently  to  widen  our  view  of  the  rehgious  life  of  man, 
prevents  us  from  assuming  so  naively  as  our  grandfathers 
did  that  the  Christian  faith  is  unique  and  independent. 
God  has  nowhere  left  Himself  without  witness.  A  great 
missionary  once  said  that  he  had  never  preached  the  Gospel 
anjrwhere  without  finding  that  God  had  been  there  before 
him.  Not  only  have  there  been  revelations  less  adequate 
than  Christianity,  but  devout  souls  through  these  less 
perfect  media  were  enabled  in  a  real  measure  to  trust 
God  and  do  His  will  with  an  obedient  faith   to  which 


4        ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

the  Father  surely  responds.  There  has  been  genuine 
fruition  for  such  worshippers,  not  aspiration  merely ; 
and  the  Church  has  scarcely  yet  appreciated  the  width  of 
the  charter  to  hope  given  by  St.  Peter's  great  words, 
*  In  every  nation  he  that  feareth  Him,  and  worketh  right- 
eousness, is  accepted  of  Him.'  ^  By  degrees  we  are  learning 
to  conceive  of  Christianity  not  as  an  isolated  thing — 
truth  in  sheer  contrast  to  ethnic  lies — but  as  the  climax 
and  crown  of  other  faiths  in  their  nobler  meaning. ^  To 
describe  one  reUgion,  however,  as  '  the  climax  and  crown ' 
of  others  is  clearly  to  discriminate  most  positively  among 
reUgions  everywhere  in  respect  of  truth  and  value  ;  it  is  to 
apply  a  standard  of  excellence  or  perfection.  Hence  we 
cannot  too  often  remind  ourselves  that  the  principles  of 
historical  research,  relating  as  they  must  to  purely  causal 
issues,  are  insufficient  for  these  deeper  questions  of  validity. 
Our  conviction,  if  we  have  it,  that  Christianity  is  the  best  re- 
hgion  in  the  world — better,  say,  than  Judaism  or  Buddhism 
— ^is  in  no  sense  the  fruit  of  merely  scientific  or  disinterested 
thought.  It  is  rather  the  reaction  of  our  whole  nature  to 
the  spiritual  meaning  with  which  the  historian's  facts 
are  laden.  It  is  a  value-judgment,  in  short,  irreducible 
to  terms  that  express  purely  causal  relationships.  And  to 
perceive  that  things  are  what  they  are  and  not  what  they 
come  from — in  other  words,  to  make  a  clear  distinction 
between  truth  and  genesis,  origin  and  value — is  the  first 
and  possibly  the  last  lesson  which  the  student  of  religious 
history  ought  to  master. 

But  before  asking  whether  and  in  what  respects  the 
Christian  faith  is  new,  it  is  necessary  to  reach  some 
working  definition  of  Christianity  itself.  What  is  the 
Christian  message  we  are  thinking  of  and  for  which  we  are 

*  Acts  X.  35. 

'  '  The  glory  of  Christianity,'  Jowett  has  said,  '  is  not  to  be  as  unlike 
other  reUgions  as  possible,  but  to  be  their  perfection  and  judgment.'  There 
ia  a  path  to  Christ  from  every  other  religion,  and  this  means  that  ethnic 
faitlu  e«n  be  related  positively  to  Christianity  as  the  goal  of  all. 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY       5 

claiming  this  original  character  ?  Here  hes  the  formidable 
problem  of  the  '  Essence  of  Christianity/  which  ever  since 
Hamack's  famous  lectures  in  1899  has  been  a  standing 
dish  at  the  board  of  theology.  Naturally  the  discussion 
has  been  ardent  and  intricate.  People  had  to  clear  up 
their  minds  as  to  the  right  method  for  fixing  the  specific 
nature  of  a  phenomenon  like  the  Christian  rehgion,  and 
whatever  view  we  take  of  the  hkehhood  that  a  general 
understanding  on  the  point  will  eventually  be  reached, 
at  least  we  have  partially  reahsed  the  immense  difficulty 
of  reaching  it.  A  survey  of  the  long  debate  would  carry 
us  far,  too  far  for  our  present  aim  ;  but  the  question,  I  am 
persuaded,  is  not  one  to  be  treated  simply  by  methods 
of  history  or  induction,  and  the  opposed  view  seems  to  me 
clearly  traceable  to  uncritical  assumptions  and  half- 
conscious  confusions  of  thought  with  regard  to  the  principles 
and  the  limits  of  history  itself  as  a  scientific  disciphne. 
No  pretence  of  scientific  rigour  can  hide  the  plain  fact  that 
we  all  decide  what  the  essence  of  Christianity  shall  mean 
for  us  by  a  judgment  of  value  formed  through  personal 
insight  or  intuition.  It  is  not  of  course  a  judgment  made 
irrespectively  of  the  historic  data,  but  from  these  data 
we  do  select  the  elements  or  aspects  of  the  many-sided 
phenomenon  known  as  Christianity  which  our  spiritual 
experience,  in  what  we  feel  to  be  our  highest  moments, 
bids  us  regard  as  vital.  It  is  so  that  Hamack  himself 
proceeds,  and  not  Hamack  only  but  his  severest  critic, 
Loisy.  For  my  part,  I  take  the  Christian  religion  to  mean, 
in  essence,  fellowship  with  God  mediated  through  Jesus 
Christ.  The  fellowship  is  not  that  of  an  isolated  individual, 
for  no  such  being  exists  ;  it  is  a  fellowship  in  which  others 
share,  for  the  Christian  life  is  nothing  without  the  mutual 
giving  and  receiving  of  the  brethren  ;  none  the  less  it  is, 
enjoyed  at  personal  centres  of  experience,  it  is  a  communion 
of  the  human  spirit  with  the  Father.  Also,  though  on  this 
I  cannot  now  dwell,  in  such  an  experience  of  fellowship 
between  man  and  God  in  Christ  there  is  involved,  first,  a 


6        ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

certain  view  of  the  world  and,  secondly,  a  certain  attitude 
to  the  world.  This  is  not  an  external  addition  tacked  on 
to  the  definition  given  a  few  lines  back,  but  a  simple 
explanation  of  what  that  definition  means  ;  for  again, 
just  as  no  isolated  person  exists,  but  only  persons  in 
society  or  participant  in  a  common  life,  so  no  human 
life  can  be  out  of  relation  to  the  world,  and  fellowship 
with  Grod  becomes  an  unreal  abstraction  if  the  relation  to 
the  world  ahke  of  Grod  and  man  is  ignored  Man  fives 
only  in  action  and  interaction  with  a  cosmic  environment, 
and  refigion,  if  it  is  to  concern  his  whole  nature,  must 
envisage  the  whole  cosmos  in  its  connection  with  God. 

Christianity  then  is  personal  communion  with  Grod, 
mediated  through  Jesus.  It  is  easy  to  quote  great  New 
Testament  expressions  of  this  central  thought — expressions 
which,  in  CJoleridge's  phrase,^  find  every  devout  heart.  We 
may  take,  for  instance,  the  words,  '  God  was  in  Christ 
reconcifing  the  world  unto  Himself  '  (2  Cor.  v.  19),  declaring 
the  Father's  act  of  self -revelation  ;  and  on  the  other 
hand,  '  Ye  who  through  Him  {i.e.  Christ)  are  befievers  in 
God  '  (1  Peter  i.  21),  indicating  the  response  on  man's 
part  that '  constitutes  him  a  Christian.  Or  if  we  want  a 
passage  to  include,  along  with  these  two  vital  features,  the 
not  less  cardinal  fact  that  Christianity  is  a  brotherhood, 
we  may  choose  1  John  i.  3  :  '  It  is  of  what  we  heard  and 
saw  that  we  bring  you  word,  so  that  you  may  share  our 
fellowship  ;  and  our  fellowship  is  with  the  Father,  and 
with  His  Son,  Jesus  Christ.'  Within  the  bounds  of  these 
clear  and  decisive  utterances  fie  the  creative  facts  and 
convictions  by  which  our  refigion  fives,  and  of  which  every 
form  of  theology,  even  an  apostle's,  can  be  no  more  than  a 
partial  interpretation.  I  wiU  also  venture  to  assume, 
without  that  full  discussion  which  the  point  merits,  that 

*  Cf.  his  impressive  remark  in  his  Confessions  of  an  Inquiring  Spirit 
( 1840) :  '  In  the  Bible  there  is  more  that  finds  me  than  I  have  experi- 
enced in  all  other  books  put  together  :  the  words  of  the  Bible  find  me  at 
greater  depths  of  my  being  ;  and  whatever  finds  me  brings  with  it  ao 
iiTMiatible  •videnc*  of  its  having  proceeded  from  the  Holy  Spirit.' 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY      7 

this  view  of  what  the  Christian  message  is  goes  back  to 
Jesus.  Whatever  in  the  Synoptic  record  may  be  uncertain, 
we  know  in  its  main  outHnes  Jesus'  thought  of  God,  of 
man,  and  of  His  own  function  amongst  men  ;  we  know 
that  He  presented  Himself  to  His  contemporaries  as  One 
who  could  bring  men  to  the  Father.  He  was  sure  that  in 
Him  God  had  visited  and  redeemed  His  people,  and  that 
trust  in  Him  gave  life  within  the  Kingdom. 

This  view  of  Christianity — a  view,  I  should  contend, 
capable  of  being  expressed  without  the  least  technicahty  of 
language — I  shall  venture  to  use  in  the  lectures  which  follow. 
It  is  sufficiently  vouched  for  by  Jesus'  own  attitude  and 
the  reaction  to  Him  of  the  great  behevers  of  the  first 
generation.  Not  merely  is  it  assumed  here  that  this  is 
authentic  Christian  rehgion  ;  it  is  also  assumed  that  the 
religion  so  construed  is  true.  Say  what  we  will,  there  is  no 
evading  the  fact  that  our  insight  into  the  Gospel,  our 
sense  of  its  import  for  ourselves  and  for  human  life,  is 
from  first  to  last  dependent  on  faith. ^  To  ignore  this, 
even  in  a  scientific  argument,  must  be  ranked  as  a  formal 
and  delusive  affectation.  We  may  have  been  taught  to, 
appreciate  all  that  is  rich  and  wonderful  in  rehgious 
history,  yet  in  the  end  believe  that  there  is  but  one  pearl 
of  great  price.  , 

Now  it  is  by  no  means  unreasonably  optimistic  to  hold 
that  the  Christian  message,  so  defined,  is,  in  the  broad 
sense  of  the  word,  original.  How  indeed  can  this  be 
questioned  ?     Every  rehgion  that  made  history  has  been 

^  '  It  is  to  the  moral  and  religious  man  himself  that  we  must  go,  not 
to  the  philosopher  weaving  theories  about  him,  if  we  are  to  understand 
his  experience  aright.  The  religious  man's  account  of  bis  experience  may 
be  overlaid  with  accretions  and  survivals  of  primitive  custom  and  beUef , 
and  on  these  accessories  philosophical  criticism  and  historical  research 
have  their  legitimate  work  to  do.  But  the  fundamental  presuppositions 
of  any  experience  must  be  accepted  from  the  experience  itself  ;  they 
may  be  explained,  but  not  explained  away'  (Pringle-Pattison,  The  Idea 
o/  Qod,  p.  252).     Goethe's  lines  recur  : 

*  Wer  den  Kiinstler  will  verstehen. 
Muss  in  Kunstlers  Lande  gehea.* 


8         ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

the  outcome  of  new,  independent  forces.  Buddhism, 
Parsism,  Orphism — these  and  other  faiths  are  manifestly 
original  in  two  respects.  They  struck  out  new  conceptions 
of  the  Ultimate  Reahty,  and  they  recommended  a  new 
attitude  to  this  Reality  on  the  part  of  man.  It  needs  to  be 
said  that  the  paltry  ambition  to  dissect  each  fresh  religious 
movement  into  so  many  minor  factors,  all  traced  meticu- 
lously in  turn  to  previous  developments,  is  ruinous 
to  genuine  research,  for  it  bars  out  the  very  notion  of 
progress,  of  Divine  creative  evolution.  There  is  a  well- 
known  story  of  the  antiquarian  who,  after  showing  to  a 
sculptor  friend  how  one  by  one  the  characteristic  features 
of  Greek  sculpture  had  been  anticipated  by  the  Egyptians, 
the  Assyrians,  and  the  Hittites,  exclaimed  in  triumph 
that  the  Greeks  had  in  fact  invented  nothing.  '  Nothing,' 
rejoined  the  other,  '  except  the  beautiful.'  The  past  is 
made  unintelligible  when  we  freeze  up  human  life  in 
immobility  and  expel  the  fact  of  growth.  Each  great 
religion,  felt  and  lived  by  from  within,  can  finally  be 
explained  only  by  itself,  never  in  terms  of  something  else. 
If  indeed  there  is  no  advance,  why  should  religions  differ  ? 
Everywhere  the  mystery  of  individual  life  confronts  us. 
And  scholarship  is  called,  by  self-interest  if  by  no  higher 
motive,  to  rid  itself  of  this  futile  and  narrow  prejudice 
according  to  which  no  new  formation  can  emerge  in 
religious  history  because  new  formation  is  opposed  to 
the  nature  of  the  world.  Life,  fortunately,  will  always 
laugh  this  a  priori  axiom  to  scorn. 

It  is  a  mistake,  however,  from  which  the  investigation 
of  primitive  Christianity  is  suffering  badly,  just  at  present. 
Every  one  knows  what  happens  constantly  in  the  study 
of  St.  Paul.  When  apparently  new  ideas  turn  up  in  the 
apostle's  thinking,  then,  if  they  cannot  be  accounted  for 
by  the  influence  of  Judaism,  they  are  at  once  set  down 
as  presumably  of  pagan  origin,  and  the  possibility  that 
they  sprang  from  the  apostle's  unprecedented  personal 
experience — his  conversion,  let  us  say — is  scarcely  glanced 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY      9 

at.  Against  this  quite  unreal  simplification  of  life  we  must 
steadily  be  on  our  guard.  When  taken  seriously  it  is  the 
death  of  human  interest.  It  would  be  strange,  then,  if 
there  were  nothing  new  in  Jesus,  since  so  much  is 
new  in  Socrates,  in  Gautama,  in  Zarathustra.  Call  the 
Founder  of  Christianity  only  a  prophet,  and  impHcitly 
you  have  predicated  novelty  of  Him,  for  prophets  do  more 
than  echo  the  past ;  they  bring  new  gains  of  truth.  They 
build  on  that  which  has  been,  but  always  they  build 
higher. 

As  historians,  therefore,  and  apart  from  aU  questions  of 
truth  or  value,  we  are  entitled  to  claim  that  the  Christian 
message  is  a  specifically  new  thing.  It  stands  out  from 
the  level  of  its  antecedents  at  least  as  boldly  as  Judaism 
from  other  forms  of  Semitic  worship.  To  be  frank,  how 
extremely  Httle  the  Gospel,  qua  Gospel,  owes  to  other 
faiths !  Doubtless  this  has  now  and  then  been  overlooked 
in  the  charmed  dehght  with  which  certain  scholars  have 
handled  the  new  tools  furnished  by  the  comparative 
Study  of  ReUgions,^  but,  when  we  have  time  to  breathe 
and  look  round  again,  how  we  invariably  find  that 
only  in  the  most  minor  details  can  any  feature  of  Biblical 
rehgion  at  its  highest  be  accounted  for  by  what  is  outside 
the  Bible.  Alleged  ethnic  parallels  to  the  Christian 
message  uniformly  prove  to  be  charged  only  in  a  faint 
degree  with  the  faith -evoking  and  Hfe-imparting  power 
that  resides  in  truth  as  truth  is  in  Jesus.  The  statement 
that  Christianity  is,  at  bottom,  a  patchwork  of  the  best 
things  in  ancient  worships  may  for  a  moment  seem  an 
imposing  generahsation  ;  come  a  Httle  closer,  examine 
the  points  that  really  count,  and  it  fades  in  vacuity.  Jesus, 
at  the  lowest,  is  the  initiator  of  a  new  rehgious  move- 
ment. 

*  The  general  thesia  which  such  writers  have  sought  to  maintain  is 
contained  in  Gunkel's  well-known  statement  that  '  the  religion  of  the 
New  Testament,  in  its  origin  and  shaping,  fell  under  the  influence  of 
alien  religions  in  important  points,  and  even  in  some  points  that  ar» 
essential '  {Zum  religionsgeach.  Veratandnis  d.  N.  T.,  p.  1). 


10       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect 

From  the  beginning,  indeed,  Christian  believers  were 
conscious  that  the  faith  into  which  they  had  entered 
marked  a  new  rehgious  era.  They  had  been  touched 
by  creative  facts.  It  is  true  that  the  early  chapters  of 
Acts  reveal  an  initial  tendency  to  beUeve  that  between 
Judaism  and  Christianity  there  existed  no  radical  an- 
tagonism, one  faith  being  simply  the  legitimate  develop- 
ment of  the  other.  But  this  soon  passed.  Even  before 
St.  Paul  it  was  clearly  understood  that  faith  in  a  crucified 
Messiah  is  a  definite  innovation,  and  the  apostle  himself 
proclaims  without  disguise  that  Judaism  is  a  different 
rehgion,  which  must  be  left  behind.  As  Professor  E.  F. 
Scott  has  put  it,  '  We  can  scarcely  overestimate  the  im- 
portance, for  the  whole  future  of  Christianity,  of  this  early 
conflict  with  a  spiritual  rehgion,  so  nearly  akin  to  itself. 
It  was  thereby  compelled  to  reahse  its  own  distinctive 
nature.'  ^  And  much  of  the  interest  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment for  a  student  Ues  in  the  fact  that  it  records  a  great 
battle  between  the  living  forces  of  Christianity  and  the 
death  and  Hfe  forces  of  the  non -Christian  rehgions  of  the 
time.  In  their  deepest  motives  Hellenism  and  Christianity 
were  poles  apart,  and  the  first  missionaries  were  taught 
by  the  felt  opposition  of  their  new  faith  and  paganism 
(in  its  broad  and  permanent  characteristics)  ever  and 
again  to  explore  the  infinite  blessing  given  in  the  person 
of  Christ.  We  can  perceive,  as  Professor  D.  S.  Cairns 
has  said,  that  '  the  whole  ApostoHc  view  grew  out  of  the 
twofold  endeavour  of  those  first  missionaries  of  the  Church 
to  meet  what  was  deep  and  true  in  the  other  rehgions, 
and  to  guard  against  the  perils  which  arose  from  the  spell 
which  these  earher  rehgions  still  cast  upon  the  minds  of 
those  who  had  been  dehvered  from  them  into  the  larger 
life  of  the  Gospel.  Thus  it  was  under  the  pressure  of  these 
spiritual  labours  that  the  latent  riches  of  the  Divine  salva* 
tion  were  brought  to  fight.'  * 

»  The  Apologetic  of  the  New  Tentament,  p.  12. 

*  Beporte  of  the  Warld  MUaionary  Confer enee  (1910),  toL  hr.  p.  21& 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     11 

This  however  is  not  the  equivalent  of  saying  that  the 
Christian  reUgion — its  faith,  its  promise,  its  ethical  and 
social  impulse — were  new  from  end  to  end.  It  does  not, 
hke  Coriolanus,  '  stand  as  if  a  man  were  author  of  himself 
and  knew  no  other  kin.'  The  nature  of  the  human  mind 
precludes  this,  as  well  as  the  continuity  of  history.  In  study- 
ing its  content  our  thought  sways  to  either  side  alternately 
as  we  accentuate  the  essential  originaUty  of  the  Gospel,  and 
on  the  other  hand  emphasise  the  vital  connection  between 
the  various  stages  in  the  development  of  reUgion.  Quite 
apart  from  the  Old  Testament,  Christianity  was  by  no 
means  original  in  its  problems — in  its  sense,  that  is,  for 
those  human  troubles,  those  evils  of  sin,  ignorance,  and 
sorrow  over  which  mankind  has  always  bent  in  agony. 
We  have  only  to  Hsten  to  the  desperate  experiments  of 
supplication  audible  in  the  higher  literature  of  paganism 
to  perceive  that  the  Gospel,  while  intensifying  the  con- 
sciousness of  sin,  was  not  the  first  voice  to  tell  man  that  he 
is  a  sinner.  What  it  brings  is  a  more  simple,  ethical, 
and  satisfying  message  of  how  the  sinful  may  become  right 
with  God.  Nor  was  the  new  faith  wholly  original  in  some 
of  its  ideas  or  phrases.  However  conscious  we  may  be  of 
the  '  authentic  rush  and  thriU  with  which  the  redeeming 
reahty  broke  upon  the  first  century,'  we  must  register  the 
fact  that  already  there  had  been  faintly  sketched  the 
contour  or  outline  of  what,  had  it  been  filled  in  by  life- 
giving  revelation,  might  in  some  real  degree  have  satisfied 
man's  need.  Seekers  after  God  had  raised  their  hands 
to  heaven  and  prayed  for  salvation  ;  they  had  conceived 
of  Divine  grace,  the  necessity  of  a  mediator,  the  power 
of  adoring  faith  to  bind  man  to  God  the  Saviour  in  a 
fellowship  of  obedience  and  love.  But  for  this  long  pre- 
paratio  evangelica,  Christian  preaching  throughout  the 
Empire  must  have  cast  the  seed  on  stony  ground.  The 
missionary  to  primitive  races  has  always  felt  that  his 
first  task,  perhaps  his  hardest,  is  to  create  those  moral 
ideas,  those  habits  of  spiritual  thought  and  imagination 


12       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

apart  from  which  the  Gospel  cannot  be  appreciated.  An 
adequate  ethical  currency  must  first  be  put  in  circulation 
if  the  new  truth  is  to  make  way.  In  various  circles  this 
currency,  as  we  have  called  it,  had  been  provided  by  the 
achievements  of  Graeco-Roman  thought.  'Christianity,' 
Baur  has  said,  '  came  at  a  time  when  the  heathen  world 
had  come  to  feel  the  profound  significance  of  the  moral 
consciousness,  and  all  that  was  most  spiritual  and  most 
practically  important  in  the  results  arrived  at  during  the 
long  course  of  Greek  ethical  speculation  had  become  the 
common  belief,  the  essential  contents  of  the  mind  of  the 
age.  All  men  now  recognised  the  truth  that  man  was  a 
moral  being  called  to  devote  his  fife  to  fulfilling  a  moral 
task.'  ^  Long  before  Christ  men  had  famiharised  each 
other  with  ideas  of  revelation,  of  incarnation,  of  atone- 
ment and  sacrament ;  ^  and  some  few  prophetic  souls 
scattered  up  and  down  the  years  had  foretold  a  day  when 
these  higher  dreams  would  be  fulfilled. 

It  is  accordingly  an  error  to  think  of  pre-Christian 
antiquity  as  barren,  not  to  say  bankrupt,  in  spiritual  im- 
pulse, or  of  Christianity  as  called  to  the  easy  task  of  filling 
a  mere  void.  New  Testament  allusions  to  pagan  worship 
are  more  often  hostile  than  not,  yet  it  also  tells  how  St. 
Paul  at  Athens  spoke  of  one  God  whom  men,  even  though 
ignorantly,  adored,  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  with  an  even 
grander  universality  points  to  '  the  real  Light,  which 
enhghtens  every  man.'  The  Fathers,  especially  the 
earUer  amongst  them,  carried  on  this  partially  sympathetic 
tradition,  as  in  Justin  Martyr's  verdict  on  the  nobler 
Greek  spirit,  or  Tertullian's  well-known  phrase,  Seneca 
saepe  noster.^  The  spots  of  light  in  paganism  are  indeed 
often  isolated,  like  sparks  in  smouldering  paper  ;    con- 

*  Church  History,  vol.  i.  p.  17. 

■  But  what  Christianity  had  in  common  with  its  environment  is  oon- 
Btrued  freshly,  what  it  brought  as  Gospel  of  its  own  it  gave  away  to  be 
the  general  riches  of  mankind  :  tA  koivo.  kuivu^,  t^  Katva  kolvCh. 

•  Plato  was  recognised  by  some  of  the  Greek  Fathers  as  ranking  with 
the  Minor  Prophets  ;  he  wrote,  says  Clement  of  Alexandria,  by  tne  in- 
epiration  of  God,  iwiirvoiq,  Qtov  (Cohort,  ad  gentes,  180a). 


1.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     13 

tinuous  development  for  the  most  part  is  lacking  ;  while 
In  many  ethnic  faiths,  those  of  India  for  example,  de- 
generation seems  a  very  fate,  the  brightest  propects  being 
quickly  overcast  and  the  truest  forms  soiled  again.  And 
in  the  very  greatest  souls  faith  is  found  to  be  constantly 
accompanied,  indeed  all  but  destroyed,  by  a  haunting 
sense  of  failure.  None  the  less,  if  we  are  to  do  justice 
to  the  environment  of  early  Christianity,  we  must  see  it 
not  in  bare  contrast  to  the  new  reUgion  but  in  the  light 
of  its  own  ideals.  Christian  faith,  it  is  quite  certain, 
triumphed  through  its  inherent  superiority  to  its  rivals, 
not  because  these  rivals  were  wholly  vile  or  fooUsh.*  The 
one  fair  method,  moreover,  is  to  acknowledge  frankly 
the  absurdity  of  comparing  the  worst  practices  of  the 
lower  pagans,  not  with  the  actual  Ufe  of  the  Christian 
multitude,  but  with  the  loftiest  and  unapproached  ideals 
of  the  foremost  Christian  teachers.  Reahties  on  one 
side  must  be  put  against  reahties  on  the  other,  ideals 
against  ideals.  Beneficence,  gentleness,  purity,  social 
virtue,  humanity,  peace  were  not  unknown  in  the  pagan 
world,  or  the  classics  would  not  for  centuries  have  formed 
the  basis  of  Western  education.  And  though  it  is  mis- 
leading to  say,  with  Farrer,  that  '  a  man  may  derive  more 
mental  and  spiritual  profit,  higher  aspirations  for  virtue, 
toleration,  and  humanity,  from  Seneca  or  Marcus  Aurelius 
than  from  writers  hke  Augustine  and  Tertulhan '  ^ — mis- 


*  In  a  suggestive  essay  on  '  The  Attitude  of  Faith  to  the  History  of 
Religions  '  (Zeitachrift  fur  Theologie  und  Kirche,  1918,  pp.  272-91)  Stephan 
points  out  how  St.  Paul  varies  his  point  of  view  in  speaking  of  Gentile 
religion.  Polytheistic  worship  roused  his  indignation  as  simply  ungodly 
(Rom.  i.  21-23).  But  in  the  thoughtful  religion  of  the  time  there  are 
elements  he  can  acknowledge  :  heathenism  itself  furnishes  proof  that 
the  power  and  attributes  of  God  are  irresistibly  impressed  on  the  mind 
by  nature  (i.  19  f.),  His  will  is  declared  in  the  witness  of  conscience 
(ii.  14  f.).  The  apostle's  general  argument  in  these  two  chapters  implies 
that  he  could  find  a  place  for  the  religion  of  both  Jew  and  Cr«ntile  in  a  great 
divine  plan,  with  real  revelation  on  the  second  side  of  the  contrast  as 
well  as  the  first.  It  looks  as  if  he  would  not  have  found  it  very  hard  to 
say  explicitly  that  all  religion  is  in  its  measure  capable  of  being  interpreted 
teleologically,  i.e.  it  educates  men  for  Christ. 

'  Paganism  and  Christianity,  p.  xii. 


14       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

leading,  because  Jesus  and  not  TertuUian  or  Augustine  is 
our  guide  in  fixing  what  Christianity  is — still  the  protest 
is  a  not  unnatural  one,  and  may  well  caution  us  against 
partisan  excess.  Paganism  at  its  best  must  be  our  standard 
of  comparison.  Nor  ought  we  to  forget  that,  as  every  reader 
of  Plato  and  Virgil  knows,  ancient  like  modem  writers 
may  have  long  outgrown  the  crude  primary  sense  of  old 
religious  phrases  which  they  still  use  without  concern. 

Clearly  we  are  working  in  a  field  where  everything 
depends  on  fight  and  shade,  on  the  precise  distribution 
of  accent.  '  La  verite,'  says  Renan,  '  consiste  dans  les 
nuances.'  Any  picture  in  pure  black  and  white  is  wrong  : 
Christianity  comes  to  fulfil  as  well  as  destroy.  In  part 
its  originafity  lies  in  its  unequalled  power  to  absorb  and 
perpetuate  the  finest  things  of  the  past.  Yet  it  is  also 
bound  to  scourge  and  expose  evil  with  that  high  moral 
jealousy  which  is  essential  if,  to  reverse  the  French  saying, 
the  good  is  not  to  prove  the  enemy  of  the  best.  Man 
is  made  for  God,  and  towards  Grod  antiquity  had  long  been 
groping,  not  without  success  ;  but  the  Grospel  is  far  from 
being  merely  a  deposit  of  the  Time-Spirit,  and  one  quite 
certain  prescription  for  making  the  New  Testament  un- 
intelfigible  is  to  overlook  the  fact  that  life  in  Jesus  Christ 
is  a  distinctive  thing.  In  recent  debate,  the  word 
'  syncretism '  has  been  tossed  about  at  random.  In 
strictness,  you  can  speak  of  syncretism  only  when  the 
contributions  to  religious  thought  made  bj'^  different  faiths 
are  admitted  on  equal  terms  ;  and  whatever  may  be  the 
truth  about  marginal  details,  to  say  that  in  the  Gospel 
of  the  New  Testament  the  ideas  of  Judaism  or  Hellenism 
rank  as  of  equal  importance  with  the  redemptive  signifi- 
cance of  Jesus  is  to  put  oneself  out  of  court.  In  the 
fife,  death,  and  victory  of  Jesus  Christ  a  new  standard  of 
reality  and  value  had  risen  before  the  human  mind,  anti- 
quating  its  predecessors,  and  it  plainly  forbade  the  young 
refigion  to  be  anj'thing  so  facile  or  so  uninspiring  as  an 
eclectic  version  of  paganism. 


I.J     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     15 

Christ,  says  the  apostle,  came  forth  '  in  the  fuhiess  of 
the  times.'  These  old  deep  words  are  filling  with  light 
and  meaning  as  our  knowledge  of  the  past  extends. 
Apologists  of  the  second  century  saw  that  the  Grospel 
had  appeared  at  a  moment  when  converging  lines  met 
from  every  side.  '  How,'  asks  Origen,  '  was  it  possible 
for  the  gospel  doctrine  of  peace,  which  does  not  permit 
men  to  take  vengeance  even  upon  enemies,  to  prevail 
throughout  the  world,  unless  at  the  advent  of  Jesus  a 
milder  spirit  had  been  everywhere  introduced  ? '  ^ 
Human  Hfe  had  gained  a  higher  unity.  The  prosperity 
of  the  Empire  had  culminated  ;  peace  overspread  the 
earth  ;  and  the  pohtical  universalism  of  the  imperial 
regime,  by  sweeping  across  barriers  raised  by  keen  national 
sentiment,  had  made  it  popularly  credible  that  one  religion — 
a  single  great  all-embracing  faith — was  the  destined  accom- 
paniment of  Empire.  There  prevailed  a  behef,  exempUfied 
in  the  Fourth  Eclogue  of  Virgil,  that  some  blessed  age 
of  gold  would  speedily  return  to  seal  the  spiritual  unity 
of  the  nations  and  give  satisfaction  to  the  loftier  feehng 
of  mankind.  Greece  had  made  its  intellectual  culture — 
its  philosophy  and  rhetoric — the  common  possession  of 
the  world.  Its  speech  formed  the  medium  of  civiHsed 
thought.  Next  indeed  to  the  religious  teaching  of  the 
Old  Testament,  Greek  philosophy  is  the  most  important 
foreriumer  of  Christian  faith.  Further,  the  spread  of 
Judaism  from  land  to  land  evinced  the  preparedness  of 
higher  minds  for  a  reUgion  that  should  be  ethical  from 
end  to  end.  Up  to  a  certain  point,  the  Jewish  Diaspora 
broke  the  way  for  Christianity.  On  all  sides  a  cry  was 
heard  for  new  divine  life,  for  a  faith  that  could  save  all 
men  and  save  their  whole  nature.  To  a  large  extent 
State  reHgion  had  sunk  in  formalism.  Many  had  taken 
to  the  assiduous  cultivation  of  inward  spiritual  experience, 
and  this  nurture  of  the  soul  obviously  made  religion 
in  an  ever  greater  degree  the  subject  of  free  choice,  in  a 

^  adv.  CeUum,  ii.  30. 


16       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

tension  deepened  and  quickened  by  the  presence  of 
numerous  competing  cults.  Ever  since  Alexander  the 
Great,  the  belief  had  been  widespread  that  at  the  basis 
of  all  national  reHgions  lay  one  tnie  universal  faith,  and 
philosophical  reflection  lent  its  aid  to  this  tendency 
to  reconcile,  to  simphfy,  to  spirituahse.^  Along  with 
this  went  a  distinct  movement  towards  monotheism, 
which,  rationaUstic  though  it  was,  drew  inspiration  from 
*  a  rationahsm  which  had  dug  its  trenches  wide  and  deep 
and  only  waited  for  rain  from  heaven  to  fill  them.'  Thus, 
as  Professor  Angus  has  expressed  it,  '  the  Gospel  of  Jesus 
could  not  have  come  at  a  better  time  to  find  men  in  serious 
mood.  Men  were  living  in  a  dangerous  transition  stage — 
between  collectivism  and  individuaHsm,  between  a  cramp- 
ing 'polis  and  a  universal  state,  between  a  pohtical  and  a 
personal-ethical  rehgion,  between  the  rehgion  of  nature 
and  that  of  revelation.'  ^  A  new  sense  of  life  and  death 
had  gone  abroad,  a  new  readiness  to  weigh  their  tremendous 
issues.  Pessimism  and  world -weariness  crept  from  soul 
to  soul.  The  value,  the  claims,  the  loneliness  of  the 
individual  insisted  on  being  recognised.  Emperor-worship 
bore  witness  to  the  craving  for  a  present  deity.  An 
old  civihsation  was  at  the  point  of  death,  and  men  longed 
for  the  hving  air  of  a  new  time. 

Thus,  in  singular  resemblance  to  the  Far  East  to-day, 
what  the  student  of  later  antiquity  finds  unrolled  before 
his  eyes  is  the  swift  break-up  of  ancestral  faiths,  leading 
men  to  scorn  what  had  long  been  revered  and  sweeping 
them  abruptly  into  vast  and  incalculable  world -movements. 
In  the  first  century  B.C.,  the  varied  rehgions  of  nature, 
crowded  with  inscrutable  sorceries  and  childish  rites, 
gave  Uttle  satisfaction  to  that  large  part  of  society  which 
sought  a  rehgion  based  on  conscience  and  was  looking 
round  for  a  safe  foothold  for  moral  life  amid  the  collapse 
of  what  had   been   believed   secure.     Old   worships  and 

»  Cf.  Wendland,  HdlenistischeRomische  KuUur,  p.  14». 
'  Environment  o/  Early  Chriatianity,  p.  68. 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     17 

old  morals  were  losing  hold  steadily,  with  nothing  so  far 
in  sight  to  take  their  place.  Tradition  crumbled  ;  dis- 
astrous effects  on  conduct  followed  ;  and  increasingly 
a  bitter  need  was  felt  for  something  soUd  on  which  to 
build  hfe — a  new  trustworthy  authority  in  reUgion  which 
should  declare  not  only  what  man  is  to  beUeve  concern- 
ing God  but  what  duty  God  requires  of  man.^  Belief  in 
the  State  reUgion  was  dead  or  dying.  It  did  not  occur 
to  Greek  or  Roman  to  ask  direction  of  a  priest  in  matters 
of  duty,  for  reUgion  and  conduct  had  no  bearing  on  each 
other.  Many,  too,  were  fatigued  by  scepticism,  and  not 
a  few  of  these  were  disposed  to  welcome  gratefully  the 
idea  of  a  Divine  revelation  able  to  enlarge  the  scope  of 
spiritual  knowledge  and  reheve  the  painful  soHtude  of  the 
interior  life.  On  all  the  deepest  things  men  were  uncertain, 
with  that  pathetic,  hesitating  uncertainty  to  which, 
centuries  before,  Plato  had  given  expression  in  one  of  the 
most  haunting  passages  in  Greek  Uterature,  where,  after 
urging  that  a  man  should  persist  until  he  has  discovered 
or  been  taught  the  truth,  '  or,'  he  continues,  '  if  this  be 
impossible,  I  would  have  him  take  the  best  and  most 
irrefragable  of  human  theories,  and  let  this  be  the  raft 
upon  which  he  sails  through  Ufe — not  without  risk,  as  I 
admit,  if  he  cannot  find  some  word  of  God  which  will 
more  surely  and  safely  carry  him.'  ^  To  quench  this 
thirst  for  assurance  something  not  wholly  unreal  was 
done.  Men  owed  most,  perhaps,  to  itinerant  preachers 
and  notable  directors  of  the  spiritual  hfe — those  striking 
and  often  earnest  figures  whom  we  read  of  as  going 
barefoot  and  penniless,  with  scanty  robe  and  simple  staff, 
through  city  and  countryside,  moved  by  the  sense  of  a 
divine  mission  to  be  the  physicians  of  sick  souls.     Like 

*  The  seat  of  authority  must  be  new,  for  as  has  been  well  said,  '  in 
80  far  as  in  fact  the  external  sanctions  fall  away  and  cease  to  be  deter- 
minants of  men's  conduct,  it  is  no  use  any  more  herding  them  back  to 
these,  and  attempting  to  supply  them  with  motives.  They  may  attain 
to  a  new  unity  of  life — they  cannot  regain  the  old*  (R.  M.  Maciver,  Ccm' 
munity,  p.  300). 

»  Phaedo,  c.  85. 


18       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTUN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

officers  of  the  Salvation  Army,  they  found  an  audience 
in  street  or  cross-roads  or  market-place,  and  they  sowed 
beside  all  waters.^  All  in  all,  it  was  a  moral  crisis  for 
humanity.  Men  laid  their  ear  to  the  ground  and  strove 
to  pierce  the  future.  If  only  there  might  emerge  a  rehgious 
authority,  sure,  real,  and  near  to  the  mind,  giving  peace 
to  troubled  consciences  and  hfting  at  the  least  a  comer 
of  death's  estranging  veil ! 

At  this  point  only  the  briefest  mention  can  be  made 
of  the  many-coloured  Syncretistic  phenomena.  Syncre- 
tism here  means  that  romantic  intermixture  of  old 
Greek  religion  with  the  Oriental  cults  which  reached  its 
acme  in  the  first  century  after  Christ,  but  had  long  been 
ripening.  In  great  measure  it  was  due  to  the  racial  blend- 
ing consequent  on  the  poHtical  rearrangements  of  Alexander 
and  his  successors.  It  also  stood  for  an  attempt  to  provide 
that  serious,  universal,  and  transcendent  or  supramundane 
religion  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the  object  of  dim, 
if  passionate,  longing.  At  a  later  stage  we  shall  have  to 
scrutinise  the  view  of  redemption  fostered  by  the  emotional 
mystic  cults  of  Phrygia  and  Egypt  that  poured  into  the 
Graeco -Roman  world — those  cults  '  which  promised  so 
much,  which  struck  so  many  universal  human  chords, 
which  seemed  to  master  that  supernatural  which  is  the 
deep  upon  which  human  life  floats  in  every  age.'  Many 
of  them  were  at  first  gross  and  orgiastic,  but  as  time  elapsed 
they  seemed  to  '  suffer  a  sea-change  into  something  rich 
and  strange.'  Such  were  the  Magna  Mater  from  Anatolia, 
Isis  and  Serapis  from  Egypt,  Mithra  from  Persia.  Ritual 
was  their  secret.  In  every  case  the  ritual  was  imposing, 
with  such  elaborate  symbohsm  as  might  be  counted  on  to 
excite  and  sustain  curiosity.  They  insisted  on  asceticism, 
yet  had  something  for  the  lower  nature  ;  they  were  care- 

*  For  the  other  side  of  the  picture,  the  corruption  in  which  much  of 
the  popular  religious  teaching  was  involved,  cf.  Glover,  The  Conflict  oj 
Religions  in  the  Early  Roman  Empire,  chap.  i.  Note  also  how  in  1  Thess, 
ii.  1-9,  St.  Paul  repudiates  the  idea  that  the  apostolic  propaganda  was 
a  secret  scheme  for  making  money. 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     19 

fully  adjusted  to  the  myths  and  pantheon  of  Hellas ;  they 
professed  to  solve  enigmas  and  cure  disease  ;  they  threw 
open  the  door  of  the  world  to  come.  Their  popularity 
is  not  wonderful.  At  a  time  when  men  were  trying  every 
means  to  get  rid  of  sin,  conceived  of  as  really  more  than 
half  physical,  these  Oriental  worships  came  forward 
promising  dehverance  from  sin  and  death  by  enabling 
the  votary  to  share  the  very  life  of  Godhead,  for  the  most 
part  through  sacramental  media.  With  all  their  faults, 
they  diffused  an  atmosphere  of  enthusiasm  and  hope  very 
grateful  to  the  jaded  soul,  and,  in  spite  of  imposture  and  im- 
morahty  often  clustering  thick  about  them,  they  appealed 
to  many  a  profound  and  ineradicable  need  which  old  poli- 
tical worships,  so  coldly  impersonal,  had  left  untouched. 
We  cannot  doubt  that  as  the  members  gathered,  in  pious 
guild  and  brotherhood,  to  contemplate  the  symbols  of 
deity  and  to  join  in  hymn  and  ritual,  many  gained  real 
help  for  a  truer  and  better  life. 

As  we  stand  away  from  the  host  of  rival  faiths  crowding 
the  civilised  world  in  the  first  century,  seeking  the  right 
perspective  and  marking  features  in  which  our  rehgion  is 
original,  it  is  obvious  we  need  not  compare  it  with  each 
ethnic  faith  in  turn,  right  down  the  Ust.  That  would  be 
labour  lost.  Only  a  few  Gentile  worships  need  even  be 
considered,  but  these  are  of  the  highest  importance.  For 
one  thing,  the  endless  multipUcity  of  rehgious  forms  can 
eventually  be  reduced  to  a  few  main  types,  which  repeat 
themselves  with  fair  regularity  ;  for  another,  the  fact  that 
Christianity  belongs  to  the  class  of  religions  which  may 
be  called  personaHstic,  in  contrast  to  pantheistic,  renders 
it  quite  unnecessary  to  raise  the  question  of  its  de- 
pendence, for  anything  Hke  constitutive  factors,  on  a 
religion  such  as  Buddhism.^  Again,  it  would  clearly  be 
superfluous  to  raise  questions  of  comparative  originality  be- 

*■  For  historical  questions  of  possible  Buddhistic  ixxfluenoes,  of.  Garb*, 
Indien  und  daa  Chriatentum,  pp.  12-61. 


20       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

tween  Christianity  and  such  faiths  as  Shintoism  or  Jainism. 
By  all  spiritual  standards  of  value  these  had  themselves 
been  long  outstripped  by  other  non-Christian  faiths  in 
purity  of  intention  and  moral  dynamic.  Possibly  the 
indigenous  religion  of  Rome  is  as  good  an  example  as  we 
require  of  the  sort  of  faith  to  which  Christianity  could 
never  by  any  chance  have  owed  anything.  Roman, 
like  all  pagan,  religion  was  a  rite  rather  than  a  doctrine  ; 
still  less  was  it  a  doctrine  sprung  from  and  fed  by  history, 
or  binding  the  faith  of  the  worshipper.  No  place  existed 
for  conscience,  or  for  the  sense  of  truth.  There  the  State 
said  :  This  is  what  you  must  all  do,  but  each  may  think 
as  he  likes.  Let  the  devotee  only  perform  the  proper 
ceremonial,  and  perform  it  properly,  and  he  was  free  to 
explain  it  or  leave  it  unexplained  as  he  pleased  ;  the  culti- 
vated sceptic  adhered  to  religious  forms  no  less  closely 
than  the  ignorant  masses  to  their  own  superstitions. 
The  gods,  for  a  Roman,  were  so  to  speak  inhabitants  of 
Rome,  and  in  any  case  were  not  personal  beings  but  the 
functional  forces  of  nature.  They  were  worshipped  on 
pohtical  grounds,  not  God  but  the  State  being  the  chief 
end.  To  quote  Mr.  Warde  Fowler  :  '  A  Roman's  interest 
was  centred  in  the  cult  rather  than  in  the  objects  of  it ; 
a  tendency  against  which  it  was  the  mission  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets  unceasingly  to  contend,  as  destructive  in  the 
long  run  of  the  noblest  ideas  of  God  and  His  relations  to 
His  people.'  *  It  is  the  crucial  instance  of  a  rehgion 
ruined  by  utility. 

In  like  manner  it  is  unnecessary  on  our  plan  to  make 
fine  distinctions  between  the  Oriental  cults  flourishing  in 
the  first  century.  No  jealousy  existed  between  them, 
and  hardly  any  proselytism.  The  Empire  demanded 
no  more  than  that  each  should  keep  his  own  faith  pro- 
vided he  did  nothing  to  insult  other  modes  of  worship. 
In  fact,  the  notion  of  a  religion  for  humanity  inspired  by 
moral  principles  is  wholly  foreign  to  ancient  civilisation, 

*  Soman  Jdetu  of  Deity,  p.  1 1. 


£.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     21 

whether  Greek  or  Roman.  Hamack  makes  the  comment 
on  Neoplatonism  that  '  it  lacked  the  power  of  exclusive- 
ness,  and  of  that  lack  it  died.'  ^  Such  tolerance  is  often 
praised,  but  in  truth  it  entails  a  neutrahty  on  moral 
questions  that  was  eventually  bound  to  poison  the  wells 
of  life.  Not  a  few  Indian  cults  show  the  same  easy  ac- 
commodation, partly  for  intellectual,  partly  for  cUmatic 
reasons.  How  far  otherwise  it  is  with  Judaism  and 
Christianity !  Both  faiths  stood  based  on  history,  both 
were  moral  to  the  core  ;  hence  in  things  of  the  spirit 
both  exhibited  a  noble  and  intransigent  jealousy  which 
is  but  one  side  of  the  loftiest  personal  conviction.  Neither 
for  one  moment  could  have  agreed  to  regard  the  highest 
good  of  man,  or  the  unity  or  character  of  Almighty  God, 
as  an  open  question.  These  were  matters  for  which  at 
any  hour  the  martyr  might  well  die. 

It  appears  then  that  the  non-Christian  religions  we  shall 
have  to  reckon  with  are,  upon  the.  whole,  tolerably  few — 
chiefly  Judaism,  Hellenism  (including  the  Oriental  cults), 
and  in  a  much  less  degree  Zoroastrianism  and  later 
Buddhism.  If  Christianity  is  an  original  faith,  it  is  so 
in  contrast  to  the  rehgions  I  have  named,  which  them- 
selves mark  the  highest  points  to  which  previous  religious 
Ufe  and  thought  had  attained  and  form  the  serious  con- 
temporary efforts  to  grapple  with  the  mysteries  of  Ufe 
and  death.  Also  at  one  point  we  shall  find  it  useful  to 
refer  to  the  attractive  Indian  doctrine  of  '  bhakti.'  Islam, 
as  a  younger  faith  than  Christianity,  is  of  course  outside 
our  field. 

Very  sfight  reflection  proves  that  our  most  serious  diffi- 
culty wiU  He  in  gauging  the  relation  of  Christianity  to 
Hebrew  religion  as  a  whole.  In  many  respects  Jesus  and 
His  followers  simply  carried  on  the  older  faith,  and  the 
apostles  were  able  to  read  the  Old  Testament  as,  in 
essentials,    a    Christian    book.    Much    of    Jeremiah,    of 

*■  Qaoted  by  Maenieol,  Indian  Thei$m,  p.  293. 


22       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

Deutero-Isaiah,  and  of  the  Psalms  is  evangelical  in  every 
line.  Thus  it  was  impossible  to  discard  the  old  thought 
of  Divine  righteousness,  or  the  vital  interdependence 
of  religion  and  moraUty,  or  the  estimate  of  sin,  or  the 
temper  of  unconquerable  hope.  Monotheism  and 
missionary  zeal  were  taken  over  as  of  course.  There 
can  obviously  be  no  question  of  novelty  here  precisely 
as  in  other  cases.  In  a  variety  of  ways  Old  Testament 
religion  and  Christianity  have  to  be  viewed  as  forming  a 
single  unified  development,  in  which  the  former  faith 
reaches  its  completion  in  the  later,  and  in  the  contrast 
with  non-Christian  reHgions  they  stand  or  fall  together. 
Nevertheless,  the  evolution  of  Bible  rehgion  is  a  long 
one,  with  stages  both  low  and  high,  and  even,  it  may  be, 
with  periods  of  retrogression  ;  and  it  is  at  Its  highest 
point,  and  only  there,  that  we  are  interested  in  it  now. 
The  problem  before  us,  to  be  quite  exact,  is  this  :  How  far, 
and  in  what  respects,  are  we  justified  in  claiming  originality 
for  Biblical  rehgion  in  its  culminating  and  most  characteristic 
form  ? 

To  settle  accoimts  with  Judaism,  meaning  thereby 
post-canonical  developments  of  Hebrew  faith,  is  easier. 
On  the  whole,  Judaism  reveals  no  remarkable  advance 
on  the  best  things  in  the  Old  Testament,  except  in  a  new 
sense  of  the  value  of  the  individual,  a  clearer  working- 
out  of  beUef  in  immortahty  (though  here  it  is  doubtful 
if  there  is  any  advance  on  the  intuitions  of  prophet  and 
psalmist),  and  in  Philo,  it  may  be  held,  a  firmer  grasp 
of  the  universahty  of  Grod  There  is  no  need  to  say  that 
Judaism  sank  to  a  far  lower  plane,  but  it  did  not  rise. 
Its  incurable  tendency  to  replace  faith  by  works,  by 
measured  obedience  to  an  external  law  is,  to  say  the  least, 
no  gain  for  the  man  who  has  learnt  religion  from  the 
prophets.^    Hence  when  the  God -fearers  who  had  been 

*  It  ia  interesting  to  recall  at  this  point  the  grounds  on  which  Ritschl 
went  solely  to  the  New  Testament  for  the  materials  of  Christian  doctrine. 
*  The  knowledge,*  he  says,  '  possessed  by  the  apostles  and  New  Testa- 
meat  writers  of  the  content,  character,  and  divine  founding  of  Cbriitianity, 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     23 

attracted  by  Jewish  worship  and  won  for  an  essentially 
Rabbinic  form  of  faith  were  brought  through  St.  Paul 
in  contact  with  the  Christian  Gospel,  they  reaHsed  instantly 
that  it  offered  a  larger  religious  life  than  they  had  shared 
in  the  synagogue,  and  one  in  which  racial  privilege  could 
no  longer  count  for  anjrthing.  The  Church  itseK  was  from 
the  very  outset  aware  of  the  difference.  To  speak  even 
of  the  first  Christian  society  in  Jerusalem  as  '  a  mere 
sect  of  Judaism '  is  quite  misleading.  '  Outwardly,  it 
is  true,  the  disciples  remained  faithful  to  the  Law,  but 
they  regarded  it  as  secondary  and  non-essential.  They 
were  conscious,  long  before  the  days  of  St.  Paul,  that  they 
stood  for  a  new  conception  of  reUgion  which  had  Httle 
in  common  with  the  reigning  Judaism.'  ^  On  the  other 
hand,  they  felt  an  instinctive  kinship  with  the  saints  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Like  Jesus,  they  went  back  to 
Deuteronomy  and  Isaiah  and  the  Psalms  for  truth  on 
which  the  soul  could  Uve. 

And  yet,  even  when  put  in  comparison  with  the  older 
revelation,  Christ  is  a  new  advance.  A  high  religion 
may  in  various  ways  become  higher  still :  it  may  reach 
a  more  satisfying  view  of  God,  a  more  thoroughgoing 
moraHsation  of  faith,^  a  completer  universahty  of  appeal. 
In  these  ways  as  in  others  Christianity  signaHsed  its  novelty 
over  against  the  faith  of  the  prophets.  This  is  a  matter 
we  shall  later  have  to  treat  of  in  detail,  and  I  shall  pass 
from  it  for  the  moment.  But  it  is  worth  while  pointing 
out  that  the  Christian  propaganda  failed  or  prospered 
in  proportion  as  the  fresh  data  for  rehgion  present  in 
Jesus  were  studiously  concealed  or  openly  proclaimed. 
A  striking  instance  is  St.  Paul's  address  at  Athens.  Even 
if  this  address  be  regarded  as  a  free  composition  of  St. 

as  also  the  thought  of  Christ  Himself,  is  distilled  through  a  genuine  under- 
standing of  Old  Testament  religion,  which  contemporary  .^daism  lacks ' 
{Rechtfertigung,  ii.  pp.  15  f.). 

*  E.  F.  Scott,  Beginnings  of  the  Church,  p.  273. 

•  Even  the  idea  of  miracle  was  moralised  (Heinrici,  Die  Eigtnart  dea 
Christentunut,  p.  18). 


24       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct 

Luke,  it  contains  much  that  is  purely  Jewish,  while  much 
more  would  have  been  congenial  to  a  monotheistically 
minded  Greek  philosopher.  Doubtless  it  sheds  Ught 
on  problems  which  had  baffled  heathen  wisdom.  In 
place  of  gods,  who  are  really  men,  the  apostle  speaks 
of  the  transcendent  spirituahty  to  be  ascribed  to  the  one 
only  true  Grod  ;  a  Grod  afar  off  he  replaces  by  One  in  whom 
we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being ;  primal  chaos 
yields  to  Divine  creation  ;  history  read  as  a  confused 
welter  of  chance  or  fate  takes  the  aspect  of  Providence 
guiding  each  race  and  people  to  its  goal ;  instead  of  the 
proud  distinction  of  Greek  and  barbarian  is  set  the  vast 
compassionate  truth  that  all  men  are  one  in  nature  and 
blood.  But  at  no  point  is  pubUcity  given  to  the  distinctive 
Christian  message ;  and  (if  the  speech  be  authentic) 
it  is  neither  priggish  nor  fanciful  to  find  in  this  studied 
omission  of  the  Cross  an  explanation  alike  of  St.  Paul's 
comparative  failure  in  Athens  and  his  subsequent  change 
of  front  at  Corinth.  There,  as  he  writes,  emphatically 
and  it  may  be  penitently,  *  I  determined  to  know  nothing 
except  Jesus  Christ,  and  Jesus  Christ  the  crucified.'  The 
Grospel  has  lost  its  savour  when  it  is  merged  in  Jewish 
commonplace. 

We  may  assume  that  in  Christianity,  as  in  other  epoch- 
making  faiths,  it  is  the  new  elements  that  tell  most.  Some 
thinkers — Schleiermacher  is  a  good  example — who  began 
by  placing  supreme  value  on  what  is  common  to  all  the 
best  religions,  have  ended  in  the  discovery  that  the  really 
imporiiant  things  are  found  only  in  Jesus.  If  the  Church's 
experience  is  sound,  a  new  and  distinctive  life  has  become 
available  in  Christ,  through  fellowship  with  whom  we 
obtain  an  exceptional  religious  blessing  not  to  be  gained 
elsewhere  :  an  unprecedented  kind  of  union  with  God 
is  now  possible,  with  new  and  newly-based  certainties 
and  hopes.  The  orientation  of  faith  is  new  in  quaUty. 
So  is  its  emotional  tone.  I  am  now  speaking  of  the  Gospel 
in  its  classic  fonn,  as  expressed,  say,  in  the  eighth  chapter 


I.]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     26 

of  Romans.  For  it  certainly  cannot  be  denied  that  with 
the  lapse  of  time  there  streamed  into  Church  thought 
and  practice  only  too  many  elements  of  pagan  syncretism, 
and  these,  too,  not  always  the  best.  The  flow  of  life  was 
again  soiled  with  incorrigible  Jewish  legalism,  the  magic 
of  mystery  cults,  the  morals  of  pre-Christian  history. 
Yet  behind  all  these  accretions  the  Gospel  persists,  and 
it  is  of  singular  interest  to  perceive  how  once  and  again 
the  Church  has  displayed  an  extraordinary  power  of 
regaining  truth  to  type — of  cleansing  and  replenishing 
its  own  hfe  by  a  return  to  the  first  springs  of  Hght  and 
love.  It  has  gone  back  to  Christ  and  taken  from  Him 
a  quickened  faith.  Such  rejuvenescence  is  explicable 
solely  by  the  fact  that  the  birth  of  Christianity  repre- 
sented the  outbreak,  or  rather  the  inbreak,  of  ultimate 
creative  forces,  flowing  from  a  source  thenceforward 
accessible  to  man  ;  and  from  these  new,  irreducible  powers 
it  has  derived  what  of  victorious  truth  and  energy  its  pro- 
gress has  revealed.  Thus  when  we  gaze  into  the  future, 
questioning  our  own  mind  as  to  what  reHgion  may  one 
day  become,  it  is  not,  as  with  Pfleiderer,  some  far-off 
fusion  of  Christianity  and  Buddhism  that  we  see  or  long 
for  ;  it  is  a  fuller  understanding,  a  larger  and  more  obedient 
reception,  of  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus. 

We  conclude,  therefore,  that  novelty  of  a  Divine  order 
and  magnitude  is  the  very  signature  of  the  Grospel,  and 
that  no  other  view  is  consistent  with  the  genius  of 
Christianity  as  it  appears  in  its  earHest  days.  But  in 
saying  this,  let  us  not  assume  indolently  that  we  have 
yet  discovered  how  far  this  novelty  extends,  or  what 
fields  of  Hfe  it  may  yet  cover.  There  is  still  more  truth  to 
break  out  from  the  great  facts  on  which  Christianity  is 
built.  The  Gospel  is  thoroughly  definite  ;  but  it  is  quick 
with  life,  and  Uke  all  Uving  things  it  exists  not  as  a  finished 
immobile  entity,  but  as  a  vital  impulse  never  to  be  spent. 
To  one  age  it  has  given  a  new  sense  of  Grod,  to  another 
a  fresh  ideal  of  personal  devotion,  to  a  third  a  social  con- 


26       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

science.  If  notoriously  it  had  bestowed  its  all,  we  should 
know  that  its  staying  power  had  gone ;  it  would  have 
exposed  its  strictly  ephemeral  character  as  plainly  as  the 
worship  of  Isis.  But  perhaps  the  greatest  thing  in 
Christianity  is  that  you  never  know  what  it  will  do  next. 
At  any  moment  it  may  break  out  at  a  new  place — seizing 
on  some  imperfectly  evangehsed  aspect  of  life  and  mould- 
ing it  to  a  higher  Ukeness,  im veiling  new  possibiUties  of 
brotherhood,  pushing  forward  its  front,  with  all  the  implied 
promise  of  faith  and  hope  and  love,  over  soils  unoccupied 
before.  Can  we  say  that  we  have  as  yet  understood 
anything  more  than  a  fraction  of  the  reUgious  significance, 
not  to  say  the  theological  suggestiveness,  of  modem 
missionary  enterprise  ?  Hence,  I  repeat,  when  we  are 
inquiring  whether  Christianity  is  to  be  regarded,  in  the 
light  of  history,  as  a  distinctively  new  thing,  let  us  make 
quite  sure  that  we  have  allowed  enough  for  its  unex- 
plored potentialities,  its  inherent  creative  powers.  Let 
us  recollect  that  the  gesta  Christi  are  a  never-ceasing 
revelation  of  Christ  Himself,  and  that,  since  it  holds  as 
true  of  a  religion  as  of  any  other  fact  that  the  cause  is 
defined  through  its  effects,  the  definition  of  Christianity 
is  in  this  sense  as  yet  incomplete.  A  final  definition, 
indeed,  is  not  possible,  for  knowledge  of  the  Gospel  grows 
in  clearness  and  fulness  as  faith  increasingly  receives 
it,  and  character  is  moulded  by  its  power.  The  world 
has  so  far  seen  only  a  part  of  what  it  can  do.  But  this 
progressiveness  of  our  faith,  far  from  being  incongruous 
with  its  finahty,  is  the  proper  and  living  consequence  of 
it.  Whereas  every  other  historic  and  prophetic  religion 
makes  progress  by  transcending  its  Founder,  Christianity 
has  grown  in  life  and  power  in  exact  proportion  as  from 
time  to  time  it  recovers  touch  with  Jesus,  submits  more 
loyally  to  His  will,  and  accepts  with  a  deeper  gratitude 
the  life  of  sonship  He  imparts. 

In  this  lecture  I  have  discussed  a  number  of  preUminary 


L]     MEANING  AND  IMPLICATIONS  OF  ORIGINALITY     27 

topics  which  it  was  convenient  to  take  together — ^none 
of  them  trivial,  and  all  of  them,  as  you  must  feel,  such  as 
deserve  a  much  more  careful  scrutiny  than  I  have  been 
able  to  apply.  In  future  lectures  I  hope  to  single  out 
what  appear  to  be  the  main  constitutive  aspects  or  elements 
of  Christianity,  both  as  a  revelation  and  an  experience, 
and  subject  them  to  more  detailed  examination,  with  a 
view  to  ascertaining  how  far  it  is  correct  to  describe  them 
as  unparalleled  and  original.  These  features  are,  first, 
the  Christian  thought  of  God,  next  the  Divine  saving  action, 
then  redemption  as  a  form  of  experience,  and  finally 
the  Christian  ethic.  All  these  four  are  vital,  and  no 
others,  as  far  as  I  can  see,  are  so  vital  as  they  are  ;  nor 
can  the  four  reasonably  be  reduced  to  a  less  number. 
Thereafter  it  will  be  proper  to  ask,  in  the  Hght  of  our 
conclusions,  whether  Christianity  so  interpreted  is  the 
absolute  or  final  reHgion  for  man,  or  marks  only  one  stage 
in  the  evolution  of  his  higher  fife.  What  grounds  have 
we  as  believers  in  Christ  for  holding  that  it  might  not  be 
superseded  to-morrow  ?  And  are  these  grounds  vaUd 
exclusively  for  faith,  or  can  they  be  stated  in  terms  that 
perforce  carry  conviction  to  every  normal  mind  ? 

The  comparative  Study  of  Religions  is  not  in  some 
ways  a  study  in  which  Christians  have  found  it  easy, 
or  at  first  rewarding,  to  engage.  AHen  reUgions  have 
seemed  to  many  the  work  of  the  devil,  and  a  close  ac- 
quaintance with  them  to  savour  of  plain  disloyalty  to 
Christ ;  to  others  the  toil  of  scholarship  has  looked  hardly 
worth  while,  and  others  still  are  tempted  off  from  gaining 
convictions  of  their  own  by  the  drowning  of  mind  and 
memory  in  a  flood  of  historical  detail.  But  once  we  have 
started,  the  fascination  of  the  thing  is  endless.  The 
gain  for  faith  is  seen  to  be  rich  and  manifold.  Not  merely 
do  we  rise  above  the  simple  but  unhappy  method  of  ex- 
plaining everything  outside  Christendom  by  human 
error  or  wickedness,  but  we  realise  freshly  how  incurably 
religious  a  being  is  man,  and  how  constant  has  been  the 


28       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lbct. 

pressure  of  God's  seeking  love  upon  His   blinded  and 
dying  children. 

*  Children  of  men !  the  Unseen  Power,  whose  ejf 
For  ever  doth  accompany  mankind, 
Hath  look'd  on  no  religion  scornfully 
That  man  did  ever  find. 

Which  has  not  taught  weak  wills  how  much  they  can  I 
Which  has  not  fall'n  on  the  dry  heart  like  rain  1 
Which  has  not  cried  to  sunk  self -weary  man :  * 
Thou  must  be  bom  again  ?  *  ^ 

*  Matthew  Arnold,  Progrm$, 


£L}  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  29 


LECTURE  II 

THE   CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OP  GOD 

In  all  higher  religions,  with  the  exception  of  primitive 
Buddhism,  the  centre  round  which  the  worship  and 
faith  of  men  have  taken  shape  is  the  thought  of  Deity, 
the  unseen  Power  or  Powers  beUeved  to  be  in  control 
of  human  life,  and  sought  after  by  the  votary  as  friends 
or  alUes.  Whether  a  particular  reHgion  does  or  does 
not  impart  satisfaction  and  moral  energy  depends  all 
but  entirely  on  its  view  of  the  Divine,  on  the  light  in  which 
it  sees  the  purpose  and  character  of  the  Supreme.  Con- 
versely, changes  in  the  thought  of  God  are  followed  slowly 
if  surely  (most  slowly  of  all  in  eschatology)  by  changes 
in  other  beUefs,  and  in  the  rites  to  which  these  beUefs  give 
rise.  It  is  accordingly  at  this  point  that  our  study  of 
detail  must  begin.  We  have  to  ask  in  what  respects  the 
God  of  the  Bible  is  justly  conceived  as  loftier  in  comparison 
with  pre-Christian  theisms.  In  this  inquiry  we  shall  do 
well  to  recall  the  notable  words  in  which  Mr.  Glover  fixes 
the  right  point  of  view.  '  There  is  one  striking  difference,* 
he  says,  '  between  Christianity  and  the  other  religions, 
in  that  the  others  start  with  the  idea  that  God  is  known. 
Christians  do  not  so  start.  We  are  still  exploring  God 
on  the  lines  of  Jesus  Christ — ^rethinking  God  all  the  time, 
finding  Him  out.    That  is  what  Jesus  meant  us  to  do.*  * 

Where  lies  the  newness  of  the  Christian  idea  of  God  ? 
The  answer  given  at  once  by  a  large  class  of  Christians 

*  Th*  Jtue  of  History,  p.  7S. 


30       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

would  be  to  the  effect  that  the  fresh  element  is  the  con- 
ception of  the  Trinity.  In  a  sense  this  is  quite  true. 
If  we  go  to  the  New  Testament  and  to  C5hristian  ex- 
perience, we  find  both  declaring  that  to  express  all  that 
believers  mean  by  God  we  must  say  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit.  Leave  out  the  redeeming  Son  of  Grod,  or  the 
principle  of  Divine  life  and  power  named  Holy  Spirit, 
both  of  which  are  upon  the  Divine  side  of  reaHty,  and 
either  omission  gives,  for  the  Christian  mind,  a  reduced 
or  incompl-ete  thought  of  God.  We  speak  in  the  sense 
of  the  New  Testament,  therefore,  when  we  say  that  the 
new  knowledge  of  God  and  His  salvation  reaches  its  cHmax 
in  faith  in  the  triune  God.  This  is  the  inevitable  synoptic 
way  in  which  we  sum  up,  not  a  speculative  construction, 
but  the  actual  revelation  of  Grod  in  history.  In  other 
words,  no  Trinitarian  doctrine  can  be  Christian  at  all 
which  is  not  vitally  Christian.  So  far  from  being  a  logical 
decoration,  it  is  a  brief  statement  of  the  Hving  truth. 
Christianity  is  distinguished  from  all  other  faiths  by  its 
message  that  a  true  and  perfect  revelation  of  God  has 
been  imparted  in  Christ,  and  that  the  Spirit  mediates  to 
men  a  corresponding  fellowship  with  the  Father.  And 
men  who  say  they  could  not  preach  on  the  Trinity  have 
confused  a  theoretic  interpretation  of  the  fact  with  the 
very  fact  itself  ;  on  second  thoughts,  I  expect,  they  would 
not  really  find  it  impossible  to  preach  on  the  great  Pauline 
word  :  '  Through  Him  we  have  access  by  one  Spirit  unto 
the  Father'  (Eph.  ii.  18). 

Those  who  single  out  the  Trinity  as  the  differential 
feature  of  our  faith,  however,  have  in  their  minds  often 
just  such  a  theoretic  dogma  as  I  have  mentioned  ;  and  in 
that  case  we  cannot  but  demur.  For  many  centuries 
philosophical  theologians  have  held  that  some  kind  of 
immanent  view  of  distinctions  within  the  Divine  Being 
has  much  to  say  for  itself,  and  I  greatly  incHne  to  agree 
with  them  ;  but  that  is  not  the  point.  We  are  discussing 
the  novelty  of  the  Christian  message,  and  it  is  simply  not 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  31 

the  fact  that  this  message  contains,  though  for  the  specu- 
lative thinker  it  may  imply,  an  articulated  Trinitarian 
dogma.  A  man  may  preach  the  Gospel  all  his  life,  with 
saving  effect,  yet  never  once  set  forth  any  such  hypothesis. 
Two  points  in  addition  have  to  be  considered  : 

(1)  The  use  of  triadic  forms  of  thought  in  contemplat- 
ing Grodhead  is  in  no  sense  pecuhar  to  Christianity.  '  It 
is  impossible,'  Westcott  writes,  '  to  study  any  single 
system  of  worship  throughout  the  world,  without  being 
struck  with  the  pecuHar  persistence  of  the  triple  number 
in  regard  to  Divinity.'  Triads  occur  in  Babylonian 
reUgion.  There  are  Egyptian  triads  as  well  as  triads 
distinctive  of  Greek  mythology.  In  later  Hinduism, 
Vishnu  and  Siva  combine  with  Brahma  in  a  kind  of  Trinity 
known  popularly  as  Trimurti.  Soderblom  has  argued 
that  though  for  a  variety  of  reasons  it  is  impossible  to 
assert  a  real  similarity  between  these  combinations  and 
the  Christian  thought  of  God,  a  quasi -analogy  might 
possibly  be  discovered  in  Buddha,  Dharma,  and  Sangha, 
the  three  Holy  or  Precious  Ones  of  Buddhism  ;  where 
Buddha  stands  for  that  which  is  revealed,  Dharma  for 
the  medium  of  revelation,  Sangha  for  the  outcome  in  human 
Hfe.^  In  all  these  examples  the  number  three  is  un- 
doubtedly prominent,  as  it  is  also  in  the  Neoplatonic 
doctrine  of  three  hypostases  in  the  Divine  essence,  the 
Supreme  Good,  Intelligence,  and  the  World-Soul.  But 
they  are  separated  at  a  bound  from  the  Christian  view 
by  this  fact,  that  they  rest  on  an  essentially  lower  moral 
conception  of  the  Di\dne.  It  is  in  the  name  of  the  Christian 
thought  of  God's  character  that  we  take  exception  to  the 
polytheism  or  pantheism  they  involve,  or  again  to  their 
total  indifference  to  history.  When  not  simply  repre- 
sentative of  natural  processes  personified,  they  spring 
out  of  philosophic  theory  manipulating  abstract  ideas. 
In  short,  they  stand  for  a  conception  of  God  which  is 
ethically  inferior  to  the  Christian  conception,  and  no  one 

^  See  bis  Voter,  Sohn  und  Oei»t, 


32       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

will  doubt  that  it  is  at  the  ethical  revelation  of  God  in 
Jesus  that  we  must  look  steadily  if  we  are  to  reach  what 
is  new  and  decisive  in  our  faith. 

(2)  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  in  any  case  an  ex- 
pression of  Christian  monotheism,  not  an  alternative  to 
it,  or  a  rival.  It  results  from  the  effort  to  reaffirm  the 
unity  of  Grod  in  the  Hght  of  Christ's  influence  and  the 
new  Spirit-filled  life  of  beUevers.  What  counts  is  always 
the  spiritual  meaning  of  God,  and  no  Trinitarian  view 
that  conflicted  with  Jesus'  teaching  on  BUs  Father's 
moral  being  would  have  the  least  chance  with  the 
Christian  mind.  At  every  point  it  is  of  this  spiritual 
meaning  that  we  have  to  think. 

Monotheism,  which  is  the  beHef  that  only  one  personal 
God  exists  and  there  cannot  possibly  be  more,  is  admittedly 
found  in  other  faiths  than  Christianity.  In  spite  of  the 
fact  that  '  monotheism  as  a  form  of  religion  was  almost 
as  incredible  to  the  ancient  world  as  polytheism  is  to  us 
to-day,'  1  behef  in  the  unity  of  God  was  everywhere  winning 
the  average  thinking  man  for  one  or  two  centuries  before 
Christ.  The  drift  to  monotheism  was  naturally  very  old. 
Apart  altogether  from  the  Hebrews,  Varuna,  an  exalted 
deity  of  old  Vedic  refigion,  had  looked  like  developing 
into  a  moral  Lord  of  all  on  something  Uke  Old  Testament 
lines,  but  afterwards,  through  subtle  forces  of  soul  and 
cHmate,  fell  away  into  a  mere  nature-god.  It  is  true 
that  the  Greek  dramatists,  Aeschylus  and  Sophocles,  use 
language  of  a  polytheist  colour  and  make  no  firm  protest 
against  the  current  pluraHsm,  so  that  to  call  them  con- 
vinced monotheists  is  barely  possible ;  but  yet,  unlike 
Homer,  they  have  nothing  to  say  about  conflicting  wills 
in  the  celestial  hierarchy,  the  predominance  of  Zeus  is 
assured,  and  no  doubt  exists  concerning  the  real  unity 
of  purpose  which  the  world  embodies.  Thought  is 
obviously  moving,  and  moving  in  a  fixed  direction.    The 

^  Hamilton,  Discovery  and  Revelation,  p.  2. 


n.l  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  33 

higher  mind,  guided  by  philosophers  and  mystics,  is 
attaining  to  beliefs  which  in  certain  important  respects 
are  comparable  with  those  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.  Plato's 
theism  may  be  disputed,  but  at  least  it  is  clear  that  he 
beUeved  in  the  unity,  the  rationality,  and  the  spirituality 
of  the  Power  or  Being  which  forms  the  ultimately  real, 
and  gives  oneness  both  to  cosmic  phenomena  and  to  the 
varied  elements  of  experience. 

Thus  the  work  of  Christian  apologetics  had  begun  long 
before  Christianity  itself.  The  task  of  exposing  idolatry 
and  polj^heism,  and  of  bringing  a  damaging  fire  to  bear 
upon  the  popular  worships  with  their  ceremonies  and 
orgies  and  foohsh  stories  about  the  gods,  was  started 
by  Xenophanes.  Socrates  and  Plato  continued  it — 
Plato,  let  us  remember,  identified  God  and  goodness — 
and  from  the  Epicureans  and  the  Academics  it  received 
a  more  intellectual  and  systematic  form.  The  moral 
nature  of  the  gods  was  proclaimed  by  writers  who  never 
clearly  grasped  the  unity  of  Godhead  ;  while  on  the  other 
hand  the  unity  was  strongly  emphasised  by  Stoicism, 
which  few  would  call  theistic,  yet  which  explained  all 
the  gods  as  but  special  forms  of  one  Divine  energy.  Even 
at  Rome  the  cult  of  Jupiter,  the  sky-god,  showed  a  drift 
towards  monotheism.  Oriental  cults  too  were  in  move- 
ment :  theocrasia,  or  the  fusion  of  deities,  became  a 
frequent  phenomenon,  as  when  Osiris  absorbs  several  older 
gods  into  himself.  Isis  in  fike  manner  is  '  one  and  all '  ; 
in  Apuleius  the  words  are  put  in  the  goddess's  Hps  :  '  My 
sole  deity  the  whole  world  worships  under  different  forms, 
with  varied  usage,  with  manifold  names.'  ^  This  species 
of  syncretism  followed  the  track  of  military  conquest, 
those  who  saw  one  monarchy  on  earth  being  apt  to  think 
there  could  be  only  one  in  heaven.  Pol5rtheist  peoples 
made  a  strong  effort  to  prove  their  own  gods  identical 
with  the  gods  of  other  lands,  different  as  the  names  might 
be.     In  other  cases  the  devotee  steadily  claimed  for  his 

>  Compare  the  whole  passage.  Met.  xi.  6. 


34       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

God  the  supreme  and  all-embracing  function.  '  It  was  an 
age,'  writes  Hatch  in  well-known  words,  *in  which  men 
were  feeHng  after  Grod,  and  not  feeling  in  vain  ;  from  the 
domains  of  ethics,  physics,  metaphysics  alike,  from  the 
depths  of  the  moral  consciousness,  and  from  the  cloud- 
lands  of  poets'  dreams,  the  ideas  of  men  were  trooping  in 
one  vast  host  to  proclaim  with  a  united  voice  that  there 
are  not  many  gods,  but  only  One,  one  First  Cause  by 
whom  all  things  were  made.'  ^ 

The  attraction  of  Judaism  for  the  ancient  world 
obviously  lay  in  its  monotheistic  conviction,  its  profound 
spiritual  simplicity.  The  Jewish  communities  of  the  great 
cities  and  beside  the  commercial  routes  of  the  Empire 
might  seem  to  practise  merely  one  more  of  the  numberless 
contemporary  national  cults.  But  the  words,  '  Hear, 
O  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God  is  Grod  alone,'  which  form 
the  first  sentence  of  the  morning  and  evening  confession 
of  faith,  though  accompanied  by  what  was  often  felt  as 
an  almost  inhuman  rehgious  exclusiveness  and  austerity, 
had  a  solemn  charm  for  simpler  hearts,  and  gained  many 
an  enlightened  pagan.     Grod  is  One  and  there  is  no  other. 

It  is  not  so  demonstrable  that  paganism  had  caught 
sight  of  the  Divine  personaUty.  The  grasp  even  of 
philosophy  on  a  truth  which  Christianity  must  regard  as 
vital  appears  to  have  been,  at  most,  transient  and  un- 
certain. Of  course  '  the  gods  '  were  personal  enough  ; 
they  were  really  too  human  to  be  divine.  But  the 
language  even  of  the  great  monistic  thinkers  is  constantly 
being  crossed  by  doubt,  and,  for  religious  faith,  to  be 
doubtful  of  God's  personal  nature  is  virtually  the  equivalent 
of  denjdng  it.  Socrates  and  Plato,  for  example,  leave 
quite  different  impressions  on  different  minds.  If  in  the 
nineteenth  century  Walter  Pater  declares  that  '  Socrates 
pierces  through  to  one  unmistakable  Person,  of  perfect 
inteUigence,  power  and  goodness,'  c»n  the  other  hand 
a    fairly    sensible    contemporary    Hke    Xenophon    seems 

*  Hibbert  Lectures ^  p.  1*. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OP  GOD  36 

never  to  have  dreamt  that  Socrates  was  anything  but  a 
polytheist.  So,  agam,  Professor  Burnet  argues  that 
'  Plato's  God  is  certainly  a  "  personal "  god,  as  we  should 
put  it ;  for  he  is  Mind  (vovs)  existing  in  a  Uving  soul '  ; 
and  of  course  no  instructed  reader  will  deny  the  presence 
of  theistic  elements  in  Plato,  particularly  in  the  Laws. 
The  trouble  is  that  so  often  he  takes  an  opposite  Une. 
Professor  Burnet  himself  cautions  us  against  supposing 
that  Plato  meant  by  God  exactly  what  a  modem  theist 
would  mean  by  the  word  ;  adding  that  in  the  Platonic 
system  '  God  is  not  the  only  self -moved  mover  but  simply 
the  best  of  them,'  while  '  the  question  of  monotheism 
or  polytheism  was  not  an  important  one  to  the  Greeks, 
and  Plato  might  have  admitted  other  gods,  so  long  as  they 
were  strictly  subordinate.'  ^  This  may  seem  to  be  casting 
back  to  the  previous  question  of  the  Divine  unity,  but  it 
is  not  really  :  the  point  is,  there  can  only  be  one  God  of  the 
personal  kind  beheved  in  by  Christians  ;  and  for  them, 
the  unity  and  personahty  are  but  distinguishable  sides 
of  the  same  truth.  We  have  to  choose,  as  far  as  I  can  see, 
between  saying  that  Plato  did  not  really  think  of  God 
as  personal,  but  (at  least  often)  took  the  moral  purpose 
of  the  universe  or  the  self -moving  source  of  good  motions, 
and  called  this  '  Grod  '  in  a  spirit  of  accommodation  to 
popular  feeUng,  and  saying  that  when  at  times  he  appears 
to  call  God  personal,  such  a  God  is  for  him  of  quite 
secondary  importance.  As  it  has  been  put,  '  it  is  the 
Ideas,  and  not,  as  in  so  many  modem  systems,  God, 
which  are,  for  Plato,  the  ens  realissimum.'  ^  Even  if 
we  overlook  an  ambiguity  in  which  religion  can  never 
rest,  there  is  obviously  nothing  here  like  a  full  parallel 
to  the  profoundly  ethical  monotheism  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets.  This  at  all  events  is  the  view  of  some  of  our 
best  Platonists. 

*  Oreek  Philosophy,  p.  336.  In  the  Laws,  written  in  his  old  age,  Plato 
provides  that  the  religious  organisation  of  bis  ideal  State  eball  inelude 
a  plurality  of  gods. 

»  A.  E.  Taylor,  Plato,  pp.  44  f. 


36       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

In  later  Greek  thought,  adumbrations  of  theism  grew 
even  fainter.  Aristotle,  who  points  to  an  Absolute  Self -con- 
sciousness devoid  of  feeling,  is  farther  oft  than  Plato 
from  the  Fatherhood  revealed  by  Jesus.  The  God  of 
Aristotle,  indeed,  is  Himself  the  sole  object  of  His  thought, 
and  the  life  of  what  we  may  call  scholar-Uke  seclusion 
more  than  once  ascribed  to  Him  is  of  curiously  Httle 
interest  to  any  moral  being.  It  is  the  same  when  we 
pass  to  the  noble  edifice  of  morals  and  philosophy  known 
as  Stoicism.  To  the  classic  Stoic,  '  God '  just  means 
the  force  and  substance  of  the  world.  From  the  first 
the  tradition  is  pantheistic  :  in  Zeno,  for  example,  Reason 
is  identified  with  a  material  substance,  spirit  and  matter 
being  variants  of  one  thing,  and  the  Grod  of  Cleanthes 
may  fairly  be  described  as  a  deification  of  Nature. 
Certainly  even  so  it  is  pantheism  with  a  strangely  personal 
tinge  ;  and  after  Posidonius  (the  master  of  Cicero),  more 
particularly  in  Seneca  and  Epictetus,  there  is  a  strong 
effort  to  be  personaHstic,  so  that  moods  akin  to  Christianity 
begin  to  find  expression.  But  the  needle  shifts  on  the 
dial  apparently  very  much  at  random.  Usually,  '  God ' 
is  pretty  much  the  equivalent  of  what  we  should  call 
the  evolutionary  process  ;  on  the  other  hand,  to  use  a 
phrase  of  Mr.  Warde  Fowler,  '  the  Stoics  were  constantly 
hovering  on  the  verge  of  a  divine  personaHty.'  ^ 

That  in  the  first  place  :  and  in  the  second,  we  miss 
that  deep  moral  passion  for  which  even  the  verbal  forms 
of  polytheism  very  soon  become  intolerable.  In  one 
place  Pronoia  is  a  personal  power,  full  of  kindness  ;  in 
another  this  '  deity  of  Law  and  Order,  one  divine  Being, 
whatever  his  name  might  be,'  fades  in  the  background, 
and  the  Force  manifested  by  the  universe  is  distributed 
in  a  pantheon.  As  Cameades  pointed  out.  Stoic  theism 
was  in  no  sense  bigoted.  It  was  ready  to  make  terms 
with  popular  mythology  and  use  polytheism  as  a  crutch 
for  the  weak,  and  Posidonius  was  not  above  forming  a 

*  Soman  Ideas  of  Deity,  p.  53. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  37 

working  alliance  with  sun-worship.  Graver  still  was 
its  patronage  of  astrology  and  divination.  On  the  main 
issue  we  find  undisguised  vacillation  even  in  Seneca. 
'  Would  you  think  of  God,'  he  says  impressively,  '  as  great 
and  gracious  and  as  merciful  as  He  is  majestic,  as  a  friend 
and  always  at  hand  ?  ...  It  is  not  temples  of  lofty 
piles  of  stones  that  should  be  raised  to  Him,  it  is  in  temples 
in  the  heart  of  each  man  that  He  should  be  consecrated.'  ^ 
But  again  he  writes,  '  What  cause  constrains  the  gods 
to  confer  blessings  on  us  ?  Their  nature.  It  is  a  mistake 
to  think  they  have  not  the  will  to  do  injury — they  have 
not  the  power.'  ^  Epictetus  is  sure  there  is  a  God,  whose 
thought  directs  the  universe,  and  whose  eye  we  cannot 
escape  not  merely  in  our  acts  but  in  our  thoughts  and 
plans  ;  elsewhere  he  observes  that  man  is  neither  less 
nor  worse  than  the  gods.  It  seems  a  mere  chance  whether 
singular  or  plural  comes  uppermost,  *  God '  or  *  gods.' 
These  men  are  representative  of  many  others  who  were 
feeling  after  a  God  in  whom  mind,  heart,  and  conscience 
could  find  satisfaction, 

'  tendebantque  manus  ripae  ulterioris  amore.' 

But  an  ever-thinning  veil  of  cloud  lay  upon  His  face. 
It  was  a  greater  faith  which  inspired  the  word,  '  God  is 
light,  and  in  Him  is  no  darkness  at  all.'  We  have  seen 
enough  to  explain  why  the  philosopher,  for  all  his  noble 
aspiration,  seemed  to  Christian  men  to  be  fundamentally 
destitute  of  a  true  acquaintance  with  God. 

Just  here  is  a  point  worth  noting.  It  was  through  the 
instrumentality  not  of  the  ancient  religions  but  of 
philosophy  that  Greek  theism  reached  its  highest  form. 
The  behef  of  Socrates  and  Plato  that  the  Being  behind 
phenomena  is  good  and  ought  alone  to  be  worshipped, 
is  a  truth  gained  by  reflection,  a  truth  of  logical  and  moral 
criticism,  not  properly  of  religious  experience.  And  as 
a  result,   the   monotheist   trend   in   Greek   thought   was 

*  Quoted  by  Lactantius,  vi.  26.  *  Spiat,  95. 


38       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

not  in  every  sense  a  gain,  for  it  meant  a  gradual  loosening 
of  ties  between  Deity  and  worshipper.  On  the  whole, 
the  importance  of  Hellenic  monotheism  as  a  movement 
does  not  Ue  in  the  fact  that  it  fulfilled  or  crowned  the  old 
religions,  for  it  killed  them  ;  it  lies  in  this,  that  by  dint  of 
lucid  thinking  it  created  intellectual  forms  into  which 
Christianity  could  pour  a  new,  richer  content  of  its  own. 

No  definition  can  ever  do  justice  to  the  new  sense  of 
God  inspired  by  Jesus,  but  we  can  hardly  miss  its  broad 
fundamental  meaning  for  Him,  and,  through  Him,  for 
His  first  disciples.  God,  He  taught,  is  '  My  Father  and 
your  Father.'  As  we  might  say,  in  a  crude  effort  at 
analysis,  Grod  is  the  personal  Spirit  in  whom  Love,  Holiness, 
and  Power  are  perfect  and  perfectly  united.  How  shall 
we  state  the  original  element  in  this  great  revelation  ? 

In  the  term  '  Father,'  as  a  descriptive  symbol,  there 
is  strictly  nothing  new  at  all.  The  word  had  been  often 
used  by  Greek  thinkers  in  a  generic  and  half-physical 
way  to  denote  the  supreme  source  of  life,  and  so  frequent 
had  it  become  in  later  Judaism  that  the  phrase  '  Our 
Father  who  art  in  heaven '  may  possibly  be  Pharisaic. 
But  it  is  not  so  much  the  word  that  matters  as  its  content, 
and  the  permanent  grounds  in  history  also  by  which 
the  truth  of  this  content  is  guaranteed  to  faith.  In  re- 
Hgious  story,  '  Father  '  has  had  a  score  of  meanings.  The 
meaning  it  held  for  Jesus  is  revealed  as  we  contemplate 
Him  in  the  act  of  prayer.  As  He  prays.  He  looks  tuto  the 
face  of  Absolute  Love  ;  He  beholds  and  speaks  directly 
to  One  who  has  all  great  blessings  to  give,  therefore  all 
lesser  things  too — One  who  can  bestow  the  Kingdom, 
forgive  sin,  and  grant  deUverance  from  grief  and  death. 

*  For  the  first  time  in  history,'  Professor  Cairns  has  written, 

*  there  appeared  on  earth  One  who  absolutely  trusted 
the  Unseen,  who  had  utter  confidence  also  in  the  Absolute 
Power  of  that  Absolute  Love  and  in  the  liberty  of  that 
Love  to  help  Him.'    Divine  Fatherhood,  in  this  great 


u.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  39 

sense,  is  a  new  planet  in  the  sky  of  faith.  It  is  not  merely 
that  we  can  register  a  crucial  advance  in  the  reading  of 
God's  character,  but — and  here  the  novelty  is  plain — the 
newly-revealed  Fatherhood  is  seen  to  be  for  ever  correlative 
to,  and  controlled  by,  the  fihal  experience  of  a  Man.  God, 
for  the  Christian  mind,  is  the  Father  corresponding 
to  Jesus  as  Son  :  we  see  Him  reflected,  without  break 
or  shadow,  in  the  Redeemer's  soul.  The  great  thanks- 
giving of  Matthew  xi.  gives  final  expression  to  Jesus' 
confidence  that  He  knew  God  in  a  way  till  then  unreaHsed, 
a  way  that  empowered  Him  for  His  work  and  enabled 
Him  to  do  for  men  all  that  they  need  to  have  done  :  '  All 
things  have  been  dehvered  unto  Me  by  My  Father  ...  no 
man  knoweth  the  Father  but  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom- 
soever the  Son  willeth  to  reveal  Him.'  The  apostles 
caught  up  the  new  note,  and  echoed  it  to  the  world,  by 
putting  the  reafity  and  precision  henceforward  attaching 
to  the  conception  of  God  into  the  characteristic  name, 
*  the  Grod  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  Thereby 
they  meant  at  least  that  God  is  He  with  whom  Jesus 
lived  in  perfect  and  unbroken  mutual  understanding, 
the  Father  to  whom  this  Son,  alone  worthy  of  the  name, 
gave  utter  love  and  trust.  We  may  annotate  this  as 
much  as  we  please  ;  we  may  analyse  the  fifial  experience 
of  Christ  and  the  mode  in  which  He  mediated  it  to  others  ; 
we  may  refine  upon  His  intuition  or  speculate  upon 
its  psychological  origins  ;  what  we  cannot  do  is  to  make 
any  addition  of  reUgious  importance  to  the  view  of  God 
He  thus  expressed  and  in  the  power  of  which  He  carried 
through  His  vocation.  The  Science  of  Rehgions,  as  a 
history,  is  compelled  to  acknowledge  frankly  that  it 
contains  moral  and  spiritual  elements  not  elsewhere 
known.  The  view  may  be  true  or  false,  but  even  as  a 
fancy  it  remains  quite  distinctive.  For  one  thing,  its 
content  was  in  part  previously  unfamiKar  ;  for  another, 
this  content  rises  out  of,  and  is  for  all  time  secured  by, 
the  conscious  experience  of  a  known  historic  person. 


40       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lect. 

Love,  Holiness  s  and  Power,  themselves  perfect  and  in 
perfect  unity — such  was  our  provisional  analysis  of  the 
idea  '  Father.'  Each  of  these  elements  calls  for  scrutiny. 
It  would  of  course  be  absurd  to  argue  that  the  ancient 
world  knew  nothing  of  Divine  love,  of  a  God  or  gods 
caring  for  mankind  and  even  for  individuals.  That 
goodness  somehow  pervades  the  order  of  things  was  a 
conviction  widely  spread.  Plato  pronounces  Divine  love 
to  be  the  ground  of  creation ;  he  in  fact  beUeved  that  by 
strictly  scientific  reasoning  he  had  estabUshed  the  con- 
clusion that  God  is  good.  At  the  other  end  of  our  period, 
Seneca  constantly  points  out  that  the  excellence  of  man 
is  an  index  of  the  Divine  nature.  He  says  :  '  Between 
good  men  and  the  gods  there  is  a  friendship  founded  on 
virtue.  Friendship  do  I  say  ?  nay,  rather  an  intimacy 
and  Hkeness,  for  a  good  man  only  differs  in  point  of  time 
from  God,  whose  disciple  he  is,  and  imitator,  and  also 
His  real  offspring.'  ^  But  '  love '  has  many  senses.  It 
covers  all  degrees  of  intensity,  purity,  and  moral  passion, 
and  the  famiUarity  of  the  term  must  not  be  allowed  to 
mislead  us  into  identifjdng  things  that  really  differ.  This 
is  specially  true  of  Greek  thought.  There,  Rohde  has 
said,  '  the  Deity  is  benevolent  toward  men  and  the  human 
race.  But  here  we  touch  the  Umits  of  Greek  reflection 
— the  idea  of  a  Divinity  whose  inmost  being  is  Love, 
Love  to  man  not  merely  to  chosen  persons,  never  dawned 
on  the  Greek  mind.'  ^  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  Plato's 
partial  assertion  was  followed  by  Aristotle's  blunt  denial, 
'  God  does  not  love  the  world,  but  the  world  loves  God.'  ^ 
The  finite,  to  the  universal  unmoved  Mover,  is  strictly 
an  irrelevance  ;  as  it  has  been  put,  '  Aristotle's  God; 
just  because  He  is  omniscient,  knows  nothing  about 
this  world  of  ours  ;  for  His  intellectual  Ufe  is  to  be  perfect, 


*  De  Providentia,  i.  »  Kleine  Schriften,  p.  327. 

'  In  like  manner  Spinoza  teaches  that  man's  supreme  happiness  ia 
amor  intellectualis  Dei,  but  has  no  place  for  the  idea  that  God  return* 
man's  love.     Cf.  Webb,  God  and  Personaliiy,  p.  70. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTUN  IDEA  OF  GOD  41 

and  the  object  of  His  thought  is  therefore  to  be  found 
only  in  the  eternal  Forms.'  ^  And  in  Stoicism,  mider 
a  superficial  stratum  of  popular  hortatory  phrases,  the 
Divine  Love  or  Groodness  represents  not  so  much  a  personal 
disposition  or  active  will  as  rather  a  physical  or  meta- 
physical principle. 

In  the  Eastern  cults  touching  gleams  shine  out  and 
seem  to  presage  more  than  they  say.  The  gods  feel  pity 
for  man,  save  him,  and  provide  for  his  needs.  Isis  is 
patient  like  a  mother  with  her  children's  faltering  prayers  ; 
she  thinks  on  their  afilictions  mercifully.  Men  were 
dreaming  of  the  good  news  :  there  is  a  dawning  sense 
of  a  Fatherhness  above,  of  a  sjnnpathetic  mind  in  the 
higher  powers  toward  human  troubles,  a  sense  which 
in  part  heralded,  in  part  produced,  the  capacity  to  take 
in  the  fuller  truth. ^  Yet  even  so,  look  where  we  may, 
the  movement  is  unfinished,  the  dream  is  sicklied  over 
with  doubt  and  fear  and  ignorance.  Nowhere  is  the 
love  of  God  apprehended  in  a  form  that  aboHshes  fear 
for  good  and  all  ;  it  is  an  attribute  Hmited,  precarious, 
and  only  partially  morahsed.  That  is  exphcable  by  the 
fact  that  it  has  never  been  connected  with  a  famihar 
and  infinitely  fruitful  exponent  Hke  the  career  and 
personaHty  of  Jesus.  There  were  real  data  in  the  world 
to  suggest  a  loving  God,  but  there  were  also  data  of  another 
kind.  That  God  is  holy  love  and  nothing  else  ;  that 
love  is  not  an  accident  but  the  essence  of  His  nature  ;  that 
this  infinite  love  flows  out  upon  its  objects  irrespectively 
of  their  moral  attainment  or  individual  privilege,  with 
the  aim  of  estabhshing  an  all-inclusive  fellowship  of  free 
conscious  persons  bound  up  in  a  spiritual  kingdom  through 
mutual  care — this,  quite  certainly,  had  not  been  credible 

*  Temple,  Mens  Creatrix,  p.  49. 

*  Webb  comments  suggestively  on  the  familiar  contrast  between  *  the 
two  types  of  God  acknowledged  by  the  Greeks,  that  of  the  "  mystery  ** 
God,  represented  by  Dionysus,  and  that  of  the  Olympian  represented 
by  Apollo,'  and  sums  up  by  saying  that  *  the  Olympian  God  is  too  tran- 
acendent,  the  "mystery  "  God  too  immanent,  to  be  precisely  what  is  meaztt 
by  a  "  personal  "  God  '  {Qod  and  Peraonality,  pp.  77-81). 


42       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

to  the  pagan  mind  till  Jesus  came.  He  gave  men  the 
courage  to  beUeve  a  new  thing  about  God,  and,  just  by 
being  Himself,  He  made  the  new  grounds  for  believing 
it  permanently  available  for  later  times. 

One  differentiating  mark  of  Biblical  faith  is  the  com- 
plete fusion,  in  the  thought  of  God,  of  Love  and  HoUness. 
Both  quahties  are  conceived  in  a  perfectly  moraUsed  way. 
It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  in  primitive  reUgion  little 
or  no  connection  obtained  between  the  holy  and  the 
righteous.  Old  Semitic  behef  and  Hellenistic  sjnicretism 
both  exhibit  the  same  oddly  non-moral  idea  of  hoUness  : 
God  is  holy,  indeed,  because  His  attitude  to  the  world 
is  noli  me  tangere,  because  real  contact  between  Him 
and  men  is  unthinkable,  or  because  He  can  be  approached 
only  after  certain  ritual  preUminaries.  By  degrees  the 
Deity  came  to  be  estimated  by  the  same  ethical  standards 
of  right  and  wrong  as  were  apphed  to  men,  yet  even  after 
the  righteousness  of  God  had  been  postulated  clearly, 
curious  lapses  or  casual  exceptions  broke  the  outHne 
of  the  thought.  Thus  nothing  is  more  typically  Greek 
than  the  notion  of  Divine  envy  striking  down  the  pre- 
sumptuous or  too  successful  man.  Herodotus  more 
than  once  gives  this  grudging  jealousy  on  the  part  of  the 
gods  a  place  among  the  positive  forces  of  history ;  and 
even  the  most  pious  writers,  Uke  Pindar,  Aeschylus, 
Xenophon,  and  even  Plutarch  himself  betray  the  influence 
of  a  view  that  must  inevitably  render  God  morally  suspect, 
since  He  is  represented  as  driving  men  into  sin  by  Ate 
or  infatuation.  Plato,  indeed,  discards  it.  *  Envy,'  he 
holds,  '  cannot  enter  the  Divine  chorus.'  But  even  on 
Plato's  mind  the  great  truth  had  not  risen  that  God's 
righteousness  is  an  essentially  missionary  attribute  ;  that 
just  because  God  is  holy,  by  immutable  nature.  He  seeks 
for  the  unholy,  to  find  them  and  make  them  Hke  Himself. 

'A  just  Gid,  and  therefore  a  Saviour ' — for  this  trans- 
figuring thought  we  must  go  to  Israel.  Both  the  justice 
and  the  salvation  it  imparts  to  men  are  moral  from  end 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  43 

to  end.  Hebrew  prophets  were  alone  in  offering  to  the 
ancient  world  a  God  of  untainted  holiness  who  insisted 
on  a  life  of  moral  integrity  in  His  worshippers.  In  their 
messages,  and  there  only,  we  are  face  to  face  with  a  God 
who  cares  more  for  goodness,  right  conduct,  humiUty, 
and  mercy  than  for  anything  else  in  the  world  ;  who 
speaks  in  the  midst  of  those  that  crowd  His  temple : 
'  Wash  you,  make  you  clean  .  .  .  cease  to  do  evil,  learn 
to  do  well,  seek  judgment,  reheve  the  oppressed,  judge 
the  fatherless,  plead  for  the  widow.'  ^  Where  is  the 
rehgion  with  a  thunder  voice  Uke  Amos  the  herdman  : 
'  You  only  have  I  known  of  all  the  famiUes  of  the  earth, 
therefore  I  will  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities  '  ?  ' 
This  unrelenting  hoHness,  with  perfect  redemption  as  its 
aim  for  man,  is  a  monopoly  of  Bible  faith.  This,  as  has 
been  justly  said,  explains  why,  when  the  rise  of  philoso- 
phical monotheism  slew  the  old  gods  and  the  old  worships, 
one  rehgion  was  excepted — the  rehgion  of  the  Hebrews, 
which  alone  could  stand  up  to  the  claims  of  the  new  moral 
consciousness.^  Of  the  truths  taken  over  by  Christianity 
none  was  more  vital  than  this  purified  thought  of  a  holy 
God. 

The  conception  of  God's  almighty  power  which 
dominates  the  Bible  as  a  whole  was,  hke  Love  and 
Holiness  at  their  highest,  a  new  thing  in  rehgious  history. 
In  reahty  the  gods  of  Greece  are  narrowly  conditioned 
beings.  They  appear  as  the  creatures  of  a  secret  Highest 
Cause,  a  hidden  Fate  by  which  their  action  is  often  con- 
fined or  frustrated.  We  may  call  them  ideal  kinsmen 
of  mankind,  more  potent  helpers  in  difliculties  which  are 
difficulties  for  them  also.  They  exist  to  be  used  by  men. 
Later  it  was  held  that  something  interior  to  the  Divine 
nature  Hmits  its  power  otherwise  than  it  is  of  course  limited, 
for  Christian  thought  also,  by  moral  and  intellectual 
necessities.     As  Clean thes  puts  it  in  his  splendid  hymn  : 

»  Isaiah  i.  16-17.  «  iii.  2. 

*  See  Hamilton,  Discovery  and  Revelation,  chap.  ii. 


44       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lect. 

*  Grod's  great  law  can  neither  hear  nor  see.'.  Epictetus 
says  that  the  gods,  just  like  men,  are  fettered  simply 
by  the  character  of  the  world.  How  in  practical  life 
this  darkened  into  FataUsm,  with  its  mournful  apparatus 
of  sorcery  and  magic,  we  shall  see  later.  No  doubt  the 
Divine  omnipotence  is  constantly  asserted  by  pagan 
writers,  some  of  them  as  httle  devout  as  Horace  ;  but  it 
is  not,  as  in  Scripture,  a  transcendent  moral  omnipotence 
— infinite  power  pervading  a  moral  universe  and  operat- 
ing under  moral  conditions.  Whereas  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, above  all  in  Isaiah,  God  is  the  high  and  holy  One, 
unsearchable  in  judgment  and  of  unapproachable  majesty, 
supreme  over  nature  because  the  Maker  and  Sustainer 
of  all  that  is.  At  first  sight  all  this  may  not  seem  to  go 
much  beyond  the  earhest  and  crudest  idea  of  Divine 
might  as  simply  the  irresistible  force  with  which  the 
god  crushes  opposition  and  condignly  punishes  the  dis- 
obedient. But — and  here  we  touch  the  distinctive  note 
of  BibUcal  faith — this  transcendent  wisdom  and  power 
are  exerted  for  a  morally  self -evidencing  end,  for  a  purpose 
to  be  reaUsed  within  the  world  and  laden  with  untold 
blessings  for  all  the  generations.  Power  is  the  instru- 
ment of  mercy.  '  The  everlasting  God,  the  Lord,  the 
Creator  of  the  ends  of  the  earth,  fainteth  not,  neither 
is  weary  ;  there  is  no  searching  of  His  understanding. 
He  giveth  power  to  the  faint.'  ^  God  is  no  longer  entangled 
in  the  world,  His  love  can  reUeve  all  finite  needs.  The 
Bible  never  wavers  in  the  conviction  that  it  takes  omni- 
potence no  less  to  redeem  the  lost  than  to  create  the  world, 
and  that,  since  creation  itself,  as  has  been  wisely  said, 
is  '  built  upon  redemption  lines,'  the  two  manifestations 
of  the  Di\dne  almightiness  are,  ultimately,  one.  Thus 
the  supreme  exaniple  of  Divine  omnipotence  at  work  is 
supplied  by  the  New  Testament  picture  of  the  world's 
salvation  through  the  Cross.  Grod  will  not  prevent  the 
crucifixion,  but  what  He  does  is  greater,  namely,  use 

1  Isaiah  xl.  28-29. 


)£.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  46 

the  human  crime  as  the  unintended  means  whereby  to 
accomplish  His  loving  plan  to  reach  and  win  the  sinful. 
Hence  it  is  in  the  Ught  of  Jesus,  and  only  there,  that  we 
can  reasonably  say,  with  a  modem  philosopher,  that 
'  the  omnipotence  means  neither  the  tawdry  trappings 
of  regal  pomp  nor  the  irresistible  might  of  a  physical 
force,'  but  rather  '  the  all-compeUing  power  of  goodness 
and  love  to  enlighten  the  grossest  darkness  and  to  melt 
the  hardest  heart,'  ^  Thus  the  working  of  the  Almighty 
is  carried  on  in  freedom,  absolute  yet  morally  qualified. 
There  is  nothing  before  God,  or  above  Him,  or  beyond 
Him — nothing  with  which  He  is  obHged  to  make  terms. 
Apart  from  this  Divine  absoluteness,  obviously,  human 
trust  or  gratitude  could  only  be  conditioned  and  partial. ^ 

One  idea  there  is  which  is  usually  beheved  to  interpose 
a  fatal  gulf  between  Christian  and  pagan  views  of  God, 
and  in  certain  ways  does  so,  but  which  none  the  less  in 
other  respects  may  point  to  a  real  approximation.  I 
mean  the  idea  of  deification.  Taken  as  it  stands,  this 
notion,  or  at  least  this  practice,  apparently  impHes  that 
the  interval  between  God  and  man  may  actually  be  crossed 
from  the  human  side.  It  is  best  known  to  us  from  the 
apotheosis  of  the  Emperor,  not  seldom  in  his  lifetime — 
a  custom  which  seems  to  have  filtered  through  to  Rome 
from  the  East,  particularly  Egypt,  and  at  times  infected 
even    Hellenistic    Jews.^    The    cult    of    the    Emperor, 

*  Pringle-Pattison,  The  Idea  of  Ood,  p.  411. 

•  '  The  essential  weakness  of  Stoicism  lay  in  its  Pantheism,  which 
effectively  excluded  from  it  anything  like  the  conception  of  "grace  to 
help  in  time  of  need."  In  these  days  of  the  popularity  of  theories  about 
"  divine  Immanence,"  it  may  be  useful  to  insist  that  any  faith  which  is 
to  regenerate  the  world  must  be  faith  in  a  God  who  is  "  without "  as  well 
as  "within."  .  .  .  The  Christian  insistence  on  God's  omnipotence  is  not 
"  meaningless."  .  .  .  Early  Christians  who  had  been  brought  up  to  stand 
in  dread  of  the  KOfffxoKpdTopes  (and  it  will  be  remembered  that  St.  Paul 
himself  thought  these  beings  too  dangerous  to  be  met  with  anything 
less  than  the  whole  armour  of  God)  had  a  very  practical  reason  for  wish- 
ing to  be  assured  that  above  the  KoafxoKp6.Topes  and  their  likes  there  wswa 
always  6  ^eoj  6  TravTOKparup'  (A.  E.  Taylor,  Mind,  1911,  p.  274). 

'  '  The  metamorphosis  of  the  imperial  power  is  the  triumph  of  the 
Oriental  genius  over  the  spirit  of  Rome  and  of  religious  over  juridical 
conceptions  '  (Cumont,  Lea  Mysteres  de  Mithra,  p.  90), 


46       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [LB<i 

associated  uniformly  with  the  divinity  of  Rome,  flourished 
everywhere,  and  might  claim  to  rank  as  the  dominant 
rehgion  of  nearer  Asia.  With  all  reserves  on  the  dis- 
tinction of  god  and  demigod,  the  underiying  motives 
of  this  cult  are  hard  for  us  to  understand.  Frequently 
the  man  chosen  for  Divine  honours  had  been  stained 
deeply  with  crime,  and  it  is  disconceriiing  to  hear  a  pure 
and  fine  spirit  like  Virgil  address  Augustus  as  deus,  pray 
to  him,  and  propose  a  temple  to  his  name.  To  call  this 
merely  contemptible  political  adulation,  however,  is 
too  simple  to  be  just.  In  large  measure  it  reveals  a 
grateful  sense  of  priceless  blessings  won  for  humanity 
on  a  wide  scale  ;  such  blessings  as  peace  on  eariJi,  some 
real  goodwill  among  men,  prosperity,  new  hope  for  hearts 
too  long  shadowed  by  fear  and  pessimism.  It  is  im- 
possible to  doubt  the  intensely  sincere  feeling  expressed 
by  a  thousand  inscriptions  that  make  the  idealised  reign 
of  Augustus  a  sori}  of  ethnic  parallel  to  the  Messianic 
hope  of  Israel.  The  meaning  of  it  all  is  that  great  men 
— on  the  contemporary  view  of  greatness — were  the 
Hkest  thing  to  Grodhead  that  age  was  able  to  conceive. 
The  apotheosis  of  Alexander,  Ptolemy,  Augustus,  the 
bestowal  on  them  of  the  epithets  '  saviour-god '  or  '  divine 
benefactor,'  was  after  all  not  the  sad  folly  it  seemed  ;  on 
the  contrary,  since  it  rested  on  their  having  done  '  good 
service  for  man,'  it  may  well  have  gone  to  raise  and  purify 
the  thought  of  divinity  as  a  whole. ^  Also  it  pointed  to 
a  deep  craving  for  a  heaven  brought  closer  to  suffering 
earth.  Apotheosis  is  proof  that  the  gods  were  felt  to 
be  indifferent,  remote,  coldly  transcendent. 

In  the  situation  of  the  pagan  worid,  then,  the  moral 
effects  of  deification  may  have  been,  up  to  a  point,  not 
altogether  harmful.  And  yet  the  thing  cleariy  belongs 
to  a  different  world  of  thought  and  feefing  from  that  of 

*  Webb  {Ood  and  Personality,  p.  71),  quoting  Pliny's  fine  saying,  Deu8 
tat  mortali  adjuvare  mortalem,  adds  that  the  sentence  means  little  more 
than  that,  since  there  was  nothing  more  divine  than  a  man  who  helps 
bis  fellows,  a  '  saviour  of  society '  might  be  properly  regarded  ag  a  God. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  47 

Scripture.  Virgil's  apostrophe  to  Caesar  Augustus  and 
the  great  ejaculation  of  Jesus,  '  I  thank  Thee,  0  Father, 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,'  are  in  effect  morally  incom- 
mensurable. Nor  is  this  all.  Apotheosis  had  really 
nothing  to  save  it  from  sheer  degeneracy.  Cruelty  was 
deified  with  as  much  ease  as  pity,  and  that  which  at  first 
may  have  been  aspiring  or  pathetic  sank  in  servihty 
and  intrigue.  The  influences  playing  upon  the  custom 
were  so  largely  official  or  pohtical  that,  when  higher 
feeling  ebbed  away,  it  became  a  serious  barrier  to  progress 
in  the  people's  mind.  If  one  Emperor  after  another 
could  thus  be  given  divine  honours,  Godhead,  in  whatever 
degree  of  Godhead,  of  necessity  ceased  to  appear  worthy 
of  the  homage  of  earnest  men.  By  degrees  the  positive 
idea  of  God  became  unimportant  as  compared  with  the 
correct  mental  attitude  of  the  votary ;  henceforward, 
as  it  has  been  put,  religion  is  *  really  a  desire  to  own  and 
propitiate  the  earthly  power  on  which  your  life  and 
happiness  depend.'  One  step  more,  and  the  object  of 
worship  will  be  the  State  itself.  Hence,  when  Christianity 
came  in  contact  with  the  official  rehgion  of  the  Empire, 
it  was  instantly  felt  on  both  sides  that  compromise  was 
impossible.  Neither  Christ  nor  Caesar  could  brook  a  rival. 
As  St.  Paul  unerringly  perceived,  heathenism  meant  on 
principle  the  worship  of  the  creature  instead  of  the  Creator  ; 
and  this  fatal  and  arrogant  mistake,  when  embodied 
in  the  social  structure,  issued  by  an  inevitable  logic  in 
the  cult  of  the  reigning  monarch. 

We  now  turn  to  a  question  of  more  difficulty,  as  well  as 
of  much  greater  rehgious  importance.  Jesus  Uved  by  faith 
in  the  Father,  and  the  same  supreme  faith  He  created 
in  His  disciples.  We  are  bound  to  ask  how  far  the  con- 
ception of  God  which  formed  the  basis  of  His  fife,  and 
which  He  communicated  to  others  through  fellowship 
and  teaching,  is  an  advance  on  the  loftiest  ideas  of  the 
Old  Testament.    The  answer  is  far  from  simple.    The 


48       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

prophetic  thought  of  Grod — we  may  for  the  moment 
concentrate  on  this — clearly  anticipates  at  point  after 
point  the  fully  Christian  thought ;  unless  it  were  so,  we 
could  not  now  preach  freely  from  Jeremiah  or  Isaiah. 
'What  human  language  can  express  concerning  the  love 
of  God  for  man/  it  has  been  said,  '  we  find  already  uttered 
in  the  Old  Testament.'  But  if  this,  or  anything  Hke  this, 
be  true,  in  what  sense  can  Jesus'  view  of  the  Father,  or 
the  view  of  the  Father  generated  in  men's  minds  by  all 
that  Jesus  was  and  did,  be  read  as  an  original  intuition  ? 
Does  He  in  fact  outgo  the  loftiest  insight  of  the  evangehcal 
prophets  ? 

It  is  the  prophets  that  we  rightly  take  for  the  basis 
of  comparison,  for  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  maintain 
that  the  interval  between  the  Testaments  added  any 
substantial  element  to  the  older  thought.  It  is  true 
that  we  now  reject  as  an  exaggeration  the  view  accord- 
ing to  which  the  two  centuries  before  Christ  were,  in  ail 
that  concerns  reUgion,  a  period  of  barren  silence.  '  We 
are  now  in  position,'  says  Dr.  Charles,  '  to  prove  that 
these  two  centuries  were  in  many  respects  centuries  of 
greater  spiritual  progress  than  any  two  that  had  preceded 
them  in  Israel.'  This,  however,  means  rather  that 
eschatology  and  ethics  were  making  up  leeway  than  that 
the  idea  of  Grod  had  really  gained  in  depth  or  purity. 
The  frigid  transcendence  of  Grod  in  later  Judaism  has 
often  no  doubt  been  unduly  emphasised.  He  has  been 
too  invariably  pictured  as  seated  on  a  throne  incom- 
prehensibly distant,  and  we  need  Dr.  Wicks's  reminder 
that  '  the  clear  doctrine  of  the  majority  of  the  authors, 
whatever  their  angelology,  is  that  of  a  God  who  is  in 
immediated  contact  with  His  creation.'^  And  j^et  this 
contact  bears  chiefly  on  the  past  and  the  future.  There 
is  more  than  a  tendency  to  what  long  after  became  known 
as  deism  ;  to  a  view  of  Grod  which  represents  Him  as  a 
non-interfering   Deity — He   holds    His   hand,   and    bidea 

*  Doctrine  of  God,  etc.,  p.  121. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  49 

His  time.  In  a  recent  critical  account  of  deism,  Professor 
Sorley  has  described  it  as  a  system  in  which  '  men  stand 
related  to  one  another  in  many  ways,  co-operating  and 
competing,  but  each  working  out  his  own  destiny  ;  man 
and  nature  stand  over  against  one  another  in  help  and 
hindrance  ;  but  God  stands  aloof,  infinitely  above  all, 
not  mingling  in  the  strife  of  the  beings  He  has  made — at 
any  rate,  not  until  the  far-off  divine  event  when  the  whole 
world  will  come  up  for  judgment.  God's  work  is  done, 
and  things  now  go  on  much  the  same — or  altogether 
the  same — as  they  would  do  if  there  were  no  God.  Since 
the  creation  He  has  rested  ;  though  it  may  be  that,  when 
the  created  world  has  run  its  course,  and  has  to  hand 
in  its  accounts,  there  will  be  a  new  period  of  divine 
activity.'  ^  It  would  be  quite  unjust  to  transfer  this 
description  as  it  stands  to  the  theology  of  later  Judaism, 
but  it  does  indicate  one  strain  of  its  thinking,  among 
others  that  were  nobler.  Grod  created  the  world,  and 
God  will  judge  the  world,  but  His  presence  in  human 
Hfe  now  and  here  is  faintly  felt.  He  does  scarcely  more 
than  permit  the  course  of  events  ;  the  age  or  seon  which 
unrolls  beneath  His  gaze  is  an  age  of  darkness,  fate,  and 
misery.  '  God  has  vanished  from  history,'  says  Bousset. 
His  simple  and  direct  names  are  replaced  by  sonorous 
adjectives  or  such  abstract  nouns  as  '  Heaven '  or  '  the 
Height.'  It  will  not  be  argued  seriously  that  this  is 
better  than  the  Old  Testament.  Compared  with  '  the 
living  God '  of  an  old  day,  how  remote  appears  the  Most 
High  whose  dwelling  is  hailstones  and  flames  of  fire,  and 
who  communicates  with  the  enraptured  seer  through 
angels  and  spirits  ! 

Again,  there  is  something  painful  in  the  absence  of 
personal  love  too  often  predicated  of  the  unseen  Lord 
of  Lords.  In  the  first  century  B.C.,  the  Apocalyptic  and 
Apocryphal  writers  incline  to  think  meanly  of  God's 
attitude  to  the  Gentiles.     Usually  He  is  represented  as 

*  Moral  Valu»9  and  the  Idea  of  Ood,  pp.  460-1. 
D 


60       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [user. 

the  God  of  Israel  alone,  and  Ben  Sira  stands  nearly  alone 
in  the  entire  literature  for  his  noble  conviction  that  '  God 
acts  directly  on  all,  as  a  Shepherd  seeking  to  bring  them 
back  to  Himself.'  ^  In  the  Book  of  Wisdom  the  beautiful 
thought  gleams  out  for  a  moment  that  God  loves  without 
distinction  of  class  or  character  ;  especially  in  the  second 
part  of  that  book  there  are  phrases  Uke  '  Thou  sparest 
all  things  because  they  are  Thine,'  or  '  O  sovereign  Lord, 
Thou  Lover  of  souls.'  Here  for  once  it  might  seem  as 
if  Judaism  had  gone  beyond  the  best  prophetic  faith. 
But  the  passages  are  curiously  isolated — beams  of  supernal 
light  with  little  reflection  in  contemporary  hopes  and 
dreams.  Jesus  Sirach  does  not  scruple  to  declare  roundly 
that  '  the  Most  High  hates  sinners.'  Li  other  docu- 
ments of  the  time  God  is  so  characterised  as  to  be  positively 
repulsive.  What  vexes  a  reader  most  is  not  that  Grod's 
nature  is  not  pictured  as  kind  and  merciful,  for  this  is 
not  forgotten  ;  it  is  rather  that  the  doctrine  is  constantly 
blurred  and  neutralised  by  assertions  of  His  pitiless  severity 
and  harshness.  Gradually  there  is  generated  the  fear 
of  a  Being  infinitely  high  and  inexorably  strict,  a  Judge 
whom  no  man  can  ever  hope  to  satisfy,  a  Legislator 
the  bitter  demands  of  whose  law  permit  to  conscience 
neither  peace  nor  joy.  The  way  is  being  prepared  only 
too  effectively  for  the  religious  teachers  of  Jesus'  day, 
with  their  endless  commandments  and  prohibitions — this 
traditional  and  statutory  piety  which  left  men  weary 
with  their  efforts  to  do  justice  to  it,  yet  never  getting 
one  step  nearer  God,  nor  finding  rest  and  Uberty  within. 

At  the  best,  even  if  this  description  be  repelled  as  too 
severe,  it  cannot  be  held  that  the  conception  of  God 
dominant  in  later  Judaism  marks  any  real  advance  on  the 
best  thoughts  of  an  earlier  day.^    In  many  typical  writers 

*  Wicks,  op.  cit.,  p.  343. 

*  One  important  contribution  of  Philo  to  the  thought  of  God's  inti- 
mate presence  in  human  life  ought  not  however  to  be  forgotten.  He 
first  seems  to  have  taught  clearly  the  presence  of  God  in  the  moral  con- 
•oiousness  of  man.     Conscience — which  he  repeatedly  identifies  with  th« 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  51 

there  is  rather  a  relapse  to  a  lower  plane  of  belief.  It 
is  still  over  against  the  Old  Testament  at  its  best  that 
we  must  set  the  new  impression  of  God  conveyed  by 
Jesus. 

Jesus  was  not  the  first  to  proclaim  the  love  of  God. 
That  love — tender,  loyal,  active,  holy — had  long  since 
been  displayed  under  the  purest  and  most  subduing 
emblems.  VitaUsing  faith  in  Jehovah's  grace  to  Israel, 
as  we  have  seen,  had  formed  the  core  and  secret  of  the 
older  religion  and  had  trained  men  to  appreciate  the 
new  religion  when  its  day  arrived.  At  the  same  time, 
Jesus  did  more  than  reproduce  the  past.  New  elements 
entered  into  His  own  experience  of  God,  and  we  can  still 
read  their  reflection  in  the  mind  of  those  who  were  led 
by  Him  to  the  Father.  It  was  not  for  such  as  He  to 
possess  His  knowledge  of  God  by  hearsay,  or  '  as  a  matter 
of  quotation.'  That  knowledge  was  original,  and  in  part 
we  can  analyse  its  originaUty. 

(1)  The  God  and  Father  of  Jesus  Christ  goes  forth  in 
search  of  the  sinful. ^  When  once  we  set  ourselves  to 
assimilate  the  ideas  of  Jesus,  to  put  away  convention  and 
allow  Him  to  build  our  faith  upwards  from  the  foundations, 
this  truth  is  one  about  which  He  forces  us  to  be  in  earnest. 
The  heart  of  God  is  for  Him  the  great  reaUty.  The  best 
that  had  formerly  been  proclaimed  was  that  God  in  mercy 
would  receive  all  who  came  back  to  Him  penitently  ; 
now,  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  religion,  it  was 
made  known  that  the  Father  unweariedly  seeks  the  lost, 

Logos — ia  the  Divine  agent  in  the  soul,  God's  impact  on  the  inner  life. 
Professor  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy  in  an  article  (Expositor,  March  1919),  to 
which  I  owe  this  note,  points  out  the  remarkable  affinity  of  Philo's  con- 
ception of  conscience  to  the  idea  of  the  'advocate'  (Tra/jd/cXjjros)  in  John 
xvi.  8. 

^  Jesus  made  this  clear  by  His  demeanour  quite  as  much  as  by  His 
teaching.  His  attitude  to  the  unworthy  startl^  men  by  its  unheard-of 
character.  '  The  Rabbis,'  writes  Mr.  Montefiore,  '  welcomed  the  sinner 
in  his  repentance.  But  to  seek  out  the  sinner,  and,  instead  of  avoiding 
the  bad  companion,  to  choose  him  as  your  friend  in  order  to  work 
his  moral  redemption,  this  was,  I  fancy,  something  new  in  the  religious 
hiatQTj  •!  lan%l '  {The  ReUffious  Teaching  of  Juus,  p.  67). 


62       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

that  He  reckons  no  cost  too  great  if  only  His  children 
can  be  reached  and  won.  As  men  stood  in  Jesus'  presence, 
as  they  looked  back  on  all  that  His  coming  had  meant 
for  them,  they  reaUsed  that  the  bounds  of  their  conception 
of  God  had  been  enlarged.  It  was  not  merely  that  Grod 
willed  their  salvation  :  He  took  the  first  step  ;  He  bowed 
to  the  law  which  makes  sacrifice  the  first  charge  on  love's 
resources.  When  St.  Peter  attempted  to  give  Christ 
advice — as  no  one  else  ventured  to — urging  Him  to  abandon 
His  fixed  intention  of  suffering  at  Jerusalem,  it  is  related 
that  Christ  turned  on  him  with  terrible  words  of  anger  : 
'  Get  behind  me,  you  Satan  !  You  are  a  hindrance  to  me. 
Your  outlook  is  not  God's  but  man's.'  ^  Suffering,  some- 
how equally  divine  and  human,  was  involved  in  the  Divine 
plan  for  human  good  ;  it  was  part  of  the  price  at  which 
forgiveness  comes  to  men.  We  can  share  this  percep- 
tion with  the  apostles  ;  it  is  open  to  us  as  much  as  to 
them.  We  too  can  see  that  in  what  He  undergoes  in 
life  and  death  Jesus  is  not  merely  pointing  upward  to 
a  Divine  love  beyond  and  above  Himself,  a  love  which 
He  does  no  more  than  announce  ;  He  is  bringing  it  in 
upon  our  soul.  We  are  not  illegitimately  making  the 
distinctions  of  later  theology,  we  are  only  registering  the 
intuitions  of  faith  before  the  Cross,  when  we  say  that  the 
distinctive  fact  in  the  Gospel  is  a  suffering  Life  in  which 
the  Father  Himself  is  present  to  give  Himself  for  man. 
Once  the  followers  of  Jesus  had  taken  in  this  truth, 
they  found  their  antecedent  thoughts  of  Grod  to  be  trans- 
formed. What  they  gained  from  Him  deepened  to  the 
very  hmit  those  visions  of  saving  Divine  tenderness  which 
had  transiently  gleamed  in  prophetic  souls  Hke  the  writer 
of  Isaiah  Hii.,  or  had  struggled  faintly  into  expression, 
it  may  be,  in  Hellenistic  beliefs  concerning  a  dying  and 
rising  god.  The  Father  rescues  men,  and  in  the  quest 
He  suffers. 

(2)  The  Fatherhood  so  declared  is  Touched  for  not  by 

>  Matt.  zvi.  23  (MofEatt). 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  53 

verbal  teaching  merely  ;  it  is  present  in  the  tangible 
personaUty  of  Jesus.  Suppose  there  to  have  been  no 
more  than  an  insignificant  novelty  of  language  in  His 
doctrine,  still  He  Himself,  the  co-efficient  of  His  doctrine, 
was  new.  No  such  person  as  Jesus  had  ever  lived  before, 
and  in  His  character  and  experience  God  was  perfectly 
known  at  last.  Every  great  man  is  greater  than  his 
language,  and  psychologists  or  historians  whose  foible 
it  is  to  disparage  the  originahty  of  humanity's  leaders 
by  asking  dubiously  how  much  of  what  they  say  had  been 
said  before,  overlook  the  vital  fact  that  epoch-making 
progress  in  the  past  has  invariably  come  not  by  words 
but  persons.  The  new  truth  about  God  became  flesh 
in  Jesus  ;  He  guaranteed  the  message  by  being  Himself  ; 
mediated  by  all  that  He  was  and  did,  it  seized  men  with 
fresh  elemental  power  and  passed  hke  fire  from  heart 
to  heart.  For  the  first  time  the  warm  unforgettable 
reahties  of  a  man's  fife  are  the  index  of  the  Unseen.  The 
greatest  truths  can  never  be  all  enshrined  in  words  ; 
they  mu«t  wait  for  a  fife  in  which  they  are  incarnate. 
Of  this  the  story  in  the  Gospels  is  the  supreme  example. 
'  In  Christ,'  says  Mr.  Glover,  '  we  reach  the  presence  of 
Grod.  God  is  there,  and  loves  to  have  you  speak  with 
Him.  No  one  has  ever  believed  this  very  much  outside 
the  radius  of  Christ's  person  and  influence.  It  is,  when 
we  give  the  words  full  weight,  an  essentially  Christian 
faith,  and  it  depends  on  our  relation  to  Jesus  Christ.'  ^ 

Hence  to  reaHse  the  new  thought  of  God,  what  is  chiefly 
required  is  not  a  grammar  or  lexicon — not  even  a  Bibfical 
Theology ;  it  is  to  stand  before  Jesus'  life,  as  before  a 
great  picture,  and  let  its  meaning  take  possession  of  us. 
A  distinctive  revelation  of  the  Father  is  given  by  His  Hfe. 
It  takes  the  whole  story  of  the  Gospels  to  tell  what  Father- 
hood means.  Old  forbidding  Judaistio  ideas  of  God's 
hoHness,  with  no  mercy  in  them  for  guilty  men,  He  dis- 
owned less  by  expUcit  statement  than  by  His  behaviour 

'  Th«  Jesus  oj  History,  p.  116, 


54       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

to  outcasts.  His  new  thought  of  God  is  manifested, 
half -unconsciously  as  it  were,  in  His  attitude  to  Zacchaeus, 
to  the  sinful  woman,  to  the  dying  thief.  Over  and  over 
again  He  Ufted  the  burden  from  the  bad  conscience,  took 
ofi  the  paralysing  touch  of  guilt,  and  once  for  all  flung 
wide  the  gate  of  righteousness  to  those  who  had  barred 
and  bolted  it  in  their  own  face.  He  claimed  to  open 
the  prison  door  to  captives  of  despair ;  and  by  a  word, 
a  look,  a  touch  of  holy  love,  He  opened  it,  so  that  in  the 
power  of  His  presence  men  stood  up,  shook  off  their  chains, 
and  passed  out  free.  When  He  had  gone,  men  were  to 
be  found  who  knew — what  before  had  not  been  known — 
that  God  is  exactly  like  Jesus  ;  as  holy,  as  kind,  as  full 
of  redeeming  power  ;  and  that  at  once,  and  before  we 
become  any  better,  this  God  is  willing  to  be  our  Father. 
To  have  enabled  the  weary  and  heavy-laden  to  believe 
this  is  the  crown  which  will  never  be  taken  from  Jesus' 
head. 

(3)  Jesus'  revelation  is  new  in  its  purity,  its  coherence, 
its  inward  spiritual  harmony.  Again  grant  for  the  moment 
that  every  word  of  Jesus  concerning  God  had  been  uttered 
previously  ;  still,  the  omissions  were  new.  The  Pharisee, 
it  is  true,  had  spoken  of  Grod's  grace  and  holiness,  but  he 
had  unfortunately  said  other  things  which  made  grace 
and  holiness  more  than  doubtful.  The  Eternal  had 
been  occasionally  represented  as  a  deity  of  autocratic 
and  capricious  power,  who  laboured  under  feelings  of 
revenge.  But  this  means  that,  truth  is  hopelessly  cancelled 
out  by  untruth.  Error  throws  it  so  far  into  the  back- 
ground that  its  power  over  conscience  and  heart  fades. 
To  give  a  pure  thought  of  God — ^to  convince  men  that 
God  is  hght  and  in  Him  is  no  darkness  at  all — is  accordingly 
to  give  a  new  thought.  This  pure  thought, of  necessity 
has  for  its  medium  a  pure  Life.  The  authentically 
Ch'^'stian  view  of  God,  from  which  the  obscuring  elements 
have  been  cleared  away,  is  distilled  through  that  which  we 
know  Jesus  to  have  been. 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  66 

(4)  National  and  particularistic  limits  are  abolished 
once  for  all.  In  the  Old  Testament,  the  Fatherhood  of 
Grod  is  strictly  a  correlative  of  the  chosen  people,  and  is 
stretched  by  way  of  exception  to  cover  the  gerim  or  resident 
ahens  who  had  become  naturaUsed  in  Israel.  We  must 
bear  in  mind  that  even  the  author  of  Psalm  xxiii.  would 
have  repudiated  the  suggestion  that  the  words,  '  The 
Lord  is  my  Shepherd,  I  shall  not  want,'  could  be  rightly 
adopted  by  a  Greek  or  Persian.  Thus  within  Israel  the 
love  of  God  is  clear  as  the  sun,  but  scarcely  God's  love 
for  man  as  man.  For  that  the  world  must  wait  for  Jesus. 
In  Him  every  limitation  is  overthrown.  The  lost  son 
in  the  Parable,  who  is  met  with  kisses  and  a  feast,  is  no 
lost  Jew  simply,  no  fallen  member  of  the  chosen  people  ; 
he  is  the  lost  man,  the  Father's  strajdng  child  in  any 
time  or  place.  Even  Jesus  uttered  no  more  piercing 
word  than  *  There  is  joy  in  the  presence  of  the  angels 
over  one  sinner  that  repenteth.' 

Let  me  add  very  briefly  that  this  universaKty  and 
gracious  nearness  of  Fatherhood,  as  conceived  by  Jesus, 
impHed  no  lowering  of  the  Divine  transcendence  or  majesty 
pictured  by  Hebrew  thought.  Transcendence,  rather, 
as  a  rehgious  idea,  now  came  to  its  own.  For  the 
kingdom  established  by  Jesus  is  a  new  world -order ; 
in  other  words,  no  mere  condition  of  the  soul  but  a  higher 
supernatural  dispensation  embracing  and  controlhng  all 
things  in  earth  and  heaven.  One  has  only  to  read  the 
Grospels  carefully  to  reahse  that  so  far  from  yielding  to 
any  Old  Testament  mind  in  His  sense  for  the  omnipotence 
and  infinite  subHmity  of  Grod,  Jesus,  as  has  been  memorably 
said,  *  deepened  and  intensified  it  to  the  absolute  utter- 
most.' ^  This  was  not  an  alternative  or  rival  to  His  sense 
of  God's  Fatherly  love.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  only  as  the 
two,  the  love  and  the  subhmity,  are  merged  in  a  single 
fihal  apprehension  that  the  reHgious  worth  of  each  stands 
out  unmistakably  and  can  be  affirmed  without  reserve. 

'  Titiufl,  Jeaus  Lehre  vom  Beiche  QoUes,  p.  104, 


56       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbctt. 

It  is  a  distinctive  feature  of  Biblical  faith  in  Grod,  especially 
in  its  perfected  New  Testament  form,  that,  unlike  the 
philosophical  monotheism  by  which  the  old  poljrtheisms 
were  overthrown,  it  is  not  the  offspring  of  any  process 
of  dehberate  or  speculative  reflection.  If  we  are  to  believe 
the  Bible  itself,  this  specific  faith  is  evoked  by  Revelation. 
As  Dr.  A.  B.  Davidson  has  said  :  '  If  men  know  God, 
it  is  because  He  has  made  Himself  known  to  them.  The 
idea  of  man  reaching  to  a  knowledge  or  fellowship  of  God 
through  his  own  efforts  is  wholly  foreign  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Moses  and  the  prophets  are  nowhere  represented 
as  thoughtful  minds  reflecting  on  the  Unseen,  and  forming 
conclusions  regarding  it,  or  ascending  to  elevated  concep- 
tions of  Godhead.  The  Unseen  manifests  itself  before 
them,  and  they  know  it.'  ^  If  it  be  said  that  this  is  to 
introduce,  unfairly,  the  distinction  of  religions  revealed 
and  unrevealed,  and  that  we  had  best  leave  Revelation 
wholly  out  of  account,  the  answer  surely  is  that  Revelation 
is  present  wherever  men  have  reached  thoughts  of  God 
which,  to  whatever  extent,  are  true  and  have  their  place 
in  a  truly  rehgious  experience.  It  is  better  to  raise  the 
level  of  other  faiths  than  to  depress  that  of  Christianity. 
Jesus  is  not  less  the  perfect  Son  that  God  has  spoken 
to  men  through  Moses  or  Gautama. 

Nor,  as  in  Eastern  cults,  is  the  Biblical  faith  in  God  de- 
rived from  mystic  ecstasy,  drowning  reason  and  moral 
consciousness  in  a  flood  of  turbid  emotion.  Always  it 
springs  from  the  experience  of  religious  men.  At  its 
highest,  it  has  been  produced  out  of  an  experience  given 
by  contact  with  a  historic  Person,  in  whom  God  is  present 
to  save  and  bless. 

This  is  a  crucial  fact.  In  a  deeper  and  more  constitutive 
sense  than  any  of  the  great  religions,  Christianity  owes  its 
faith  in  God — alike  the  content  of  that  faith  and  its  grounds 
— to  historical  revelation  ;  and  the  Church  still  actually 
lives  on  the  reafities  which  Jesus  Christ  brought  into  the 

*  Art.  '  God  *  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  oj  the  Bible,  vol.  iu 


n.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEA  OF  GOD  57 

world's  history.  It  is  true  that  Buddhism  was  founded 
by  a  real  person,  as  was  Islam.  But  Islam  is  a  descendant 
of  Christianity  ;  and  in  Buddhism,  notoriously,  no  im- 
portance or  reaUty  whatever  is  attached  to  prophetic 
knowledge  of  the  Hving  God,  or  to  a  Divine  purpose  coming 
to  fulfilment  through  the  processes  of  human  Hfe.  Our 
faith  therefore  has  this  pecuhar  possession,  with  which 
no  other  can  compare — at  its  heart  there  stands  a  perfect 
Life,  expressive  of  the  Father.  Whereas  Eastern  cults 
offer  only  the  symboUsm  of  cosmic  legend,  it  brings  forth 
a  Man,  instinct  with  faith  and  love.  Thus  the  doubt 
haunting  all  reUgious  Hfe  in  Greece  and  Rome,  whether 
Divinity  at  all  cares  for  our  worship  or  will  hear  our  prayer, 
is  for  ever  set  at  rest.  God  is  a  Hving  Presence  who  visits 
and  redeems  His  people. 

As  every  one  knows,  there  are  grave  risks  and  appar- 
ently prohibitive  drawbacks  in  such  a  vital  relationship 
between  faith  and  historical  events.  These  the  Christian 
religion  has  accepted  calmly.  Never  was  there  faith  so 
plagued  by  problems  of  historic  certitude,  or  intellectual 
and  moral  resources  poured  out  so  lavishly  on  the  elucida- 
tion and  defence  of  that  connection  of  our  beHefs  with 
past  events  which  has  always  been  felt  to  be  a  matter  of 
Hfe  and  death.  How  faith  can  rest  on  fact  which,  Hke 
other  elements  of  the  temporal  succession,  like  all  other 
bygone  things,  can  never  be  exhibited  as  necessary  in 
thought,  and  which  would  lose  its  special  quaHty  of 
Divine  wonderfulness  if  it  could — this  enigma,  I  suppose, 
Christianity  has  entirely,  or  almost  entirely,  to  itself. 
These  difficulties  have  not  been  allowed  to  obscure  the 
vast,  inimitable  truth.  Our  faith  stands  alone  in  the 
claim  that  the  Power  transcendent  over  the  universe 
coincides  in  moral  being  with  One  who  Hved  on  earth, 
and  that  if  we  would  see  into  the  life  of  things  we  must 
gaze  upon  a  Crossr 


68      ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 


LECTURE  III 

THE   DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITT 

Christian  faith,  as  we  have  seen,  consists  in  the  stedfast 
certainty  that  God  the  Father,  who  is  Absolute  Love, 
also  has  absolute  power  to  help  men,  and  that  His  in- 
finite resources  are  available  for  all  who  put  their  trust 
in  Him.  This  faith  has  been  evoked  by  the  spectacle 
of  a  righteous  and  loving  Will  operating  in  history,  with  a 
clearness  and  intensity  which  constantly  increase  until  they 
reach  a  climax  in  the  person  of  Jesus,  in  whom  God  takes 
our  burdens  upon  Himself,  and  who,  through  His  death 
and  victory,  has  opened  to  all  beHevers  the  life  of  Divine 
sonship.  It  is  of  first-rate  importance  to  mark  that  Grod 
is  not  conceived  as  deahng  solely  with  the  individual. 
On  the  contrary,  what  Christ  founded  was  a  kingdom — 
a  fellowship  of  God  with  men  and  accordingly  of  all  men 
with  each  other.  This  feature  distinguishes  Bible  thought 
sharply,  for  example,  from  the  thought  of  India,  where 
religion  has  always  been  merely  a  concern  between  the 
individual  and  the  Divine,  and  does  not  lead  the  worshipper 
to  identify  himself  with  a  purpose  of  Grod  in  the  world. 

This  large  and  profound  view  of  God's  saving  action, 
without  which  Christianity  could  neither  be  nor  be  con- 
ceived, plainly  rests  on  certain  great  underl3dng  concep- 
tions. To  begin  with,  it  rests  on  a  special  thought  of 
Creation.  The  absolute  Uberty  of  Grod  to  help  men  can 
have  no  meaning  except  in  so  far  as  the  whole  world  owes 
to  the  Divine  will  ahke  its  being  and  its  continuance  in 
being.  It  is  of  no  consequence  whether  we  state  or  do  not 
state  this  unconditional  dependence  of  the  world,  sym- 


ni.l  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  59 

boIicaUy,  in  terms  of  '  creation  out  of  nothing,'  a  phrase 
whose  significance  is  doubtful ;  the  point  is  that  God  is 
not  to  be  conceived  as  face  to  face  with  previously  existing 
materials,  with  which  He  makes  terms.  On  the  contrary, 
He  constitutes  the  world-system,  as  well  as  shapes  its 
course,  in  perfect  freedom.  The  theory  of  emanation, 
according  to  which  the  world  proceeds  from  Grod  by  some 
inevitable  nature-process,  is  once  for  all  discarded.  Some 
crucial  elements  in  this  view  are  distinctive  of  BibHcal 
faith.  Not  merely  is  there  a  marked  absence  from 
Scripture  of  ideas  hke  that  of  the  primeval  chaos  ^  out 
of  which  world  and  gods  rise  together — cosmogony  and 
theogony  being  two  aspects  of  one  fact  ^ — ^ideas  native  to 
the  old  Oriental  polytheisms  which  the  Creation  narratives 
of  Genesis  silently  discredit.  Above  all  we  have  to  think 
of  subhme  convictions  to  which  the  great  prophets  give 
expression,  and  of  the  deep  prophetic  faith  by  which  the 
historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  inspired  and 
controlled.  To  take  only  one  instance,  it  is  impossible  to 
read  Deutero -Isaiah  without  reaHsing  afresh  the  reUgious 
importance  of  a  true  idea  of  Divine  creative  Hberty, 
exerted  not  at  the  beginning  merely  but  throughout  all 
time,  as  well  as  the  nobly  consoUng  power  with  which,  in 
the  hands  of  reUgious  genius,  it  can  be  apphed  to  trem- 
bling human  hearts.  Everywhere  the  prophet  uses  the 
same  fundamental  ideas  as  pervade  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis  and  make  that  chapter,  in  Gunkel's  words,  '  a 
landmark  in  the  history  of  Revelation.'  ^  Nowhere  else 
than  in  such  Bible  utterances  is  Grod  pictured  as  above 
the  world  and  before  it — He  the  free  agent  summoning  it 
to  be,  all  that  fives  and  exists  the  product  of  His  will. 

This  absolute  thought  of  Divine  creation  had  no  place 
in  the  Greek  mind.  In  earfier  Greek  fiterature  the  higher 
power  merely  shapes    cosmic  matter  ;  the  gods  are  not 

•  Not  that  the  idea  of  chaos  is  not  found  in  Genesis  ;  it  is  present  in 
P's  account  of  creation,  but  it  is  a  chaos  subject,  and  related,  to  God. 

•  In  Hesiod,  cosmogony  is  actually  older  than  theogony. 

•  Die  Religion  in  Oetchichte  xtnd  Oegenwart,  article  '  Schopfung.* 


60       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

distinct  from  the  world,  but  part  of  it.  The  offspring 
of  blind  forces,  they  derive  from  the  Earth-Mother  or 
from  Chaos.  As  Pindar  puts  it  concerning  gods  and  men  : 
'  Both  from  one  mother  have  life  and  breath.'  The 
birthday  of  a  god  was  celebrated  by  festival.  When  we 
open  Plato,  particularly  the  Timaeus — that  hymn  of  the 
universe  whose  writer  was  later  beHeved  to  have  plagiarised 
from  Genesis — we  still  meet  with  the  old  haunting  con- 
ception, found  also  in  Aristotle,  of  an  avdyKtj  in  things, 
that  mechanical  necessity  which  imports  into  the  world 
of  experience  a  contingent  or  casual  factor,  and  prevents 
it  from  being  a  perfect  embodiment  of  reason.  Here 
to  '  create '  means  only  to  bring  order  where  disorder 
had  reigned  ;  and  this,  Plato  teaches,  can  only  be  done 
partially.  From  God  nothing  comes  but  good,  yet  He 
is  thwarted,  Uke  a  plastic  artist,  by  the  inherent  faults 
of  the  material  He  works  in.  He  is  still  subject  to  a 
remnant  of  necessity  which  He  cannot  overcome.^  This 
duaUstic  view  of  a  world  constituted  by  two  independent 
and  CO -eternal  principles,  though  not  without  elements 
of  speculative  suggestiveness,  is  not  the  faith  of  Scripture. 
Nowhere  does  the  helplessness  of  ancient  thought,  even  of 
the  best  Stoicism,  when  faced  by  ultimate  spiritual 
problems,  betray  itself  more  clearly.  But  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  build  on  a  thought  of  Creation  which 
is  religious  from  end  to  end.  The  Almighty  Maker  of 
heaven  and  earth  is  equal  to  all  faith's  demands  ;  His 
mighty  purpose  of  grace  will  be  fulfilled  at  last,  for  He  is 
creator,  not  artificer.  How  cardinal  this  is  to  the  piety 
of  Jesus  I  need  not  stay  to  prove.  It  is  moreover  a 
conception  that  eventually  enabled  the  Church  to  shake  off 
old  cosmic  notions  by  which  Hellenistic  religions  had  been 
hampered  from  the  start.  The  world  is  God's  world, 
whatever  hold  evil  may  have  got  upon  it  ;  He  made  all 
things  freely,  and  He  rules  in  perfect  love  that  which  He 
has  made. 

*  Cf.  Jowett,  Introduction  to  the  Timaeu9, 


ra.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  61 

A  second  presupposition  of  the  Christian  trust  in  God 
our  Saviour  is  a  distinctive  view  of  man.  To  Jesus,  each 
man  is  a  lost  child  of  the  Father  who  may  be  found  and 
blessed  in  love  and  service.  In  one  sense  this  is  simply 
Old  Testament  truth,  with  every  racial  Umitation  swept 
away.  In  Greek  thought,  however,  man  is  commonly 
regarded  as  a  duplex  being  compounded  of  spirit  and 
matter,  who  Uves  perpetually  under  the  influence  of  de- 
monic powers.  Essentially  he  ranks  as  a  denizen  of  earth, 
the  flotsam  of  unending  tides  of  change.  Mysterious  and 
inaccessible  forces,  his  superiors  by  far  in  nature  and 
might,  surround  and  rule  his  Hfe.  None  the  less,  along- 
side of  this  melancholy  view,  throughout  the  course  of 
Greek  reflection  there  went  a  subUme  conviction  of  the 
true  divinity  of  the  human  soul,  which  indeed  may  be 
called  the  main  doctrine  of  Plato's  rehgion.^  Man  is 
properly  human  just  in  proportion  as  he  is  divine. 
Possibly  this  conception  reached  Plato  from  Orphic  and 
Pythagorean  sources  ;  at  aU  events,  he  himself  gave  it 
poetic  and  religious  forms  of  such  impressiveness  as  to 
quicken  in  the  best  minds  a  noble  dissatisfaction  with  the 
human  lot.  It  led  him  to  asceticism — a  most  un -Hellenic 
aberration,  certainly — yet  an  asceticism  that  itself  in- 
dicated emphatically  the  felt  value  of  the  soul.  Later, 
Stoicism  reverted  to  the  Orphic  view  of  a  divine  soul 
immured  in  body  as  in  a  dungeon.*  Man  qua  intelligence 
is  a  member  of  reason's  cosmos.  And,  since  Reason  is 
perfectly  reahsed  in  '  God,'  the  soul  is  a  spark  of  Deity. 
Thus  Stoicism,  by  placing  man's  essence  in  intellect,  remains 
faithful  to  the  aristocratic  ideals  of  Greek  philosophy. 

It  is  on  different  lines  that  the  Christian  thought  of 
man  has  moved.  Not  intellect  but  moral  will  takes  the 
central  place  ;  with  the  result  that  the  soul,  as  such, 
however  weak  or  ignorant  or  stained,  is  regarded  as  possess- 

*  See  Adam,  Vitality  of  Platnniam,  pp.  35  ff. 

'  The  Stoic  theory  of  knowledge,  it  luust  bo  remembered,  ia  a  thorough* 
going  sensationalism. 


62       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

ing  an  intrinsic  preciousness  which  no  distinctions  of 
birth,  talents,  or  education  can  affect. ^  The  idea  is  finally 
rejected  that  union  with  God  is  a  privilege  reserved  for 
the  ehte  of  human  kind,  or  that  such  union  is  to  be  reaHsed 
exclusively  by  way  of  philosophical  contemplation.  No 
one  before  Christ  held  or  practised  the  view  that  not  even 
the  whole  world  is  the  equivalent  of  a  man's  soul.  There 
is  no  need  to  labour  the  point.  If,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
Gospel  introduces  a  richer  and  more  satisf3dng  thought 
of  God,  its  thought  of  man,  since  the  two  ideas  vary 
together,  must  reap  the  benefit  of  that  all-controlhng 
change. 2  And  it  does.  The  Christian  conception  of  man 
— of  his  nature,  his  state,  and  his  destiny — is  distinctive. 
If  in  ancient  thought  the  relation  of  man  to  the  world, 
man  set  in  a  physical  environment  and  derived  from 
physical  antecedents,  had  been  in  view,  what  the  Bible 
gives  is  an  original  doctrine  of  his  nature  and  destiny  as 
involving  relations  to  God.  The  Father  revealed  in  Jesus 
stretches  out  His  hands  to  man  as  His  loved  offspring, 
seeking  to  be  one  with  him  for  ever,  counting  him  worthy 
even  of  the  amazing  sacrifice  of  Christ.  Everything  is 
involved  in  this — the  consciousness  of  our  kinship  to  God, 
of  freedom,  of  estrangement,  of  reconcihation.  The  value 
of  man  as  man  comes  out  as  he  stands  in  Jesus'  presence. 
That  this  is  a  fresh  idea  we  perceive  even  while  reading 
the  noblest  passages  of  Stoic  Hterature,  where  the  Di^^ne 
nature  of  the  soul  is  constantly  presented  as  a  strong 
motive  for  virtuous  Hving  and  purity  of  heart.  '  If  a 
man  could  worthily  grasp  this  opinion,'  says  Epictetus, 
'  that  we  are  all  in  a  special  sense  the  children  of  God, 
and  that  God  is  the  Father  both  of  gods  and  men,  I  imagine 
he  would  think  nothing  mean  or  vulgar  about  himself.' 
The  saying  is  a  fine  one,  but  no  exact  thinker  will  identify 
it  with   the  Christian  view.     It  is  interested  chiefly  in 

*  Celsus  takes  a  radically  opposed  view  (Origen,  adv.  Cels.,  vii.  41). 
=Webb  points  out  that  philosophical  discussion  of  human  personality 
was  posterior  in  time  to  theological  discussion. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  63 

what  man  is  ;  it  is  silent  on  the  illimitable  prospect  of 
what  man  may  become  through  the  Divine  intention 
revealed  in  Christ.  That  new  dimension  Epictetus  had 
not  measured.  If — which  is  certain — he  does  not  mean 
by  '  God '  what  the  Grospel  means,  neither  could  '  man ' 
be  for  him  what  the  word  signifies  for  Christianity. 

Thus  over  and  over  again  we  recur  to  the  conclusion 
that  everything  changes  with  a  changed  view  of  Grod. 
Let  two  examples  suffice.  First,  the  Christian  estimate 
of  sin,  as  the  culmination  of  Old  Testament  intuitions, 
is  a  new  thing  in  the  ancient  world.  Not  of  course  that 
Greeks  or  Orientals  denied  sinfuhiess  as  a  fact.  Doubt- 
less the  idea  of  sin  was,  as  such,  uncongenial  to  the  Greeks, 
and  original  sin,  had  they  encountered  the  notion,  would 
most  probably  have  been  rejected  as  meaningless.  At 
the  same  time,  the  pagan  world  confessed  to  an  ever- 
deepening  awareness  of  moral  failure  ;  as  Hausrath  puts 
it  memorably,  '  the  complaint  raised  by  Hebrew  con- 
science in  the  dawn  of  history  becomes  the  evening  in- 
vocation of  Hellenic  philosophy.'  Protests  against  vice, 
luxury,  avarice,  hjrpocrisy  grew  louder  and  more  insistent. 
But  not  even  in  Virgil  or  Seneca  is  the  sinfulness  of  sin 
revealed  as  it  is  revealed  in  Scripture.  Full  acknowledg- 
ment is  made  of  guilt,  frailty,  incurable  corruption,  and 
actually,  as  in  the  Sixth  Book  of  the  Aeneid,  of  '  a  certain 
fearful  looking  for  of  judgment.'  But  we  miss  the  per- 
ception, apart  from  which  the  New  Testament  would 
cease  to  be  itself,  that  sin  i?.  what  it  is  because  committed 
against  Holy  Love.  Here,  and  only  here,  it  is  defined 
not  merely  by  its  antagonism  to  man's  higher  fife,  or  to  the 
best  interests  of  society,  but  by  defection  from  or  opposi- 
tion to  the  Living  God.  The  historian  of  morafity  no  less 
than  the  theologian  must  register  the  fact  that  human 
estimates  of  sin  have  been  profoundly  intensified  by  the 
influence  of  Jesus.  Outside  the  Bible,  the  rehgious  view 
of  sin  is  constantly  being  displaced  or  overshadowed 
by  the  ethical :  it  is  folly,  sickness,  ugliness,  not  properly 


64       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

mistrust  or  rebellion  against  Love,  and  a  Love  of  which 
Calvary  is  the  measure.  The  difference  is  not  super- 
ficial but  radical,  for  at  its  heart  there  Ues  a  different 
vision  of  God. 

Similarly,  to  take  a  second  instance,  with  the  con- 
ception of  individuaUty.  The  Hellenistic  age  exhibits 
an  ever-increasing  consciousness  of  personality  which, 
as  we  might  expect,  advances  hand  in  hand  with  the 
spread  of  cosmopohtanism.^  A  fuller  view  of  the  human 
person  had  been  slow  in  emerging.  Plato  himseK  fell 
short,  for,  though  he  rose  to  the  organic  idea  of  the  State 
as  a  union  of  men  based  upon  the  division  of  labour  accord- 
ing to  capacity,  a  union  in  which  the  citizen  is  a  member 
of  the  whole  in  virtue  of  the  special  office  he  discharges, 
yet  his  development  of  this  idea  involved  him  in  grave 
inconsistencies.  '  Sharing,  as  he  does,'  says  Caird,  '  in 
the  Greek  view  that  the  higher  life  is  only  for  the  few 
— for  those  who  are  capable  of  intellectual  culture,  and 
in  proportion  as  they  are  capable  of  it — ^he  is  unable 
to  conceive  the  lower  classes,  those  engaged  in  agriculture 
or  industrial  labour,  as  organic  members  of  the  State  ; 
he  is  obUged  to  regard  them  as  the  instruments  of  a  society 
in  whose  higher  advantages  they  have  no  share.'  ^ 
Aristotle  repeats  this  idea  in  more  prosaic  terms,  repre- 
senting the  Greek  almost  as  a  being  of  a  different  species 
from  the  barbarian,  and  decHning  to  recognise  the  artisan 
or  tradesman  as  fitted  to  perform  the  true  functions  of 
a  citizen.  Human  society,  he  would  say,  is  a  hierarchy 
with  slaves  and  mechanics  at  its  base,  next  in  ascending 
order  those  who  carry  on  the  administrative,  judicial, 
and  legislative  work  of  the  State  and  enjoy  its  privileges, 
and  at  the  top  philosophers  given  up  solely  to  con- 
templation. 

Progress  in  the  direction  of  the  sounder  view  that  the 

*  '  The  significance  of  the  Jews  and  Greeks  in  the  history  of  Religion 
it  after  all  due  to  the  intensity  of  individuality  in  their  prophets  and 
thinkers  '  (Glover,  Constructive  Quarterly  for  July  1918,  p.  308). 

*  Evolution  of  Theology,  vol.  i.  p.  142. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  65 

individual  is  man  as  man,  and  eo  ipso  universal — that 
individuality  rests  on  the  organic  character  of  society 
in  which  the  labourer  is  as  much  in  place  as  statesman 
or  sage — was  in  great  measure  the  outcome  of  religious 
development.  The  third  and  second  centuries  before 
Christ  were  a  period  marked  by  the  slow  jielding  of  the 
restraints  of  State  or  national  rehgion.^  The  individual, 
whose  happiness  or  misery  had  perforce  merged  itself 
indistinguishably  in  that  of  the  community  whose  un- 
challenged law  governed  him  and  whose  service  supplied 
his  highest  motive,  gradually  rose  and  stood  erect.  He 
began  to  ask  himself  how  he  could  live  the  wider  hfe  of 
self-consciousness  and  humanity.  Voluntary  associations 
multipUed  fast ;  domestic  life  took  a  new  value  ;  the 
position  of  woman  was  bettered  ;  in  a  variety  of  ways 
people  were  thrown  back  on  their  own  resources  and  gave 
a  free  rein  to  subjective  impulse.  Philosophy  and  in 
particular  ethics  assumed  a  practical  complexion  suited 
to,  and  coloured  by,  the  study  of  the  private  concerns 
of  life,  and  through  many  channels  the  conviction  was 
carried  abroad  by  Stoic,  by  Epicurean,  by  Sceptic,  by 
Eclectic  that  the  centre  of  man's  Uving  interest  is  at 
home,  because  the  only  things  worth  having  are  within. 
In  the  fifth  century  '  Know  thyself '  had  been  the  Socratic 
maxim ;  in  the  first,  Virgil  echoes  him  in  a  sadder 
strain  that  reveals  a  deepening  despair :  Quisque  suos 
patimur  manes,  *  we  all  suffer,  each  in  his  own  spiritual 
being.' 

Thus  with  a  new  intensity  men  began  to  care  for  their 
own  souls.  Cultivating  the  higher  life  they  yearned 
for  personal  access  to  Deity,  and  the  unshared  experience 
of   individual   devotion.    No    longer,    the    better    minds 

*  How  clamant  the  need  for  advance  was  may  be  gathered  from  the 
funeral  oration  of  Pericles,  in  which,  as  has  been  said,  '  there  is  not  one 
syllable  about  the  gods,  one  word  of  gratitude  to  heaven,  or  a  single 
expression  of  solace  to  the  relations  of  the  dead  based  on  any  hope  of 
immortality.  In  the  service  of  the  State  Pericles  saw  every  incentive 
and  every  reward  '  (Moore,  Religious  Thought  of  the  Greeks,  p.  113). 


(6       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

held,  could  religion  be  inherited  by  physical  descent, 
or  enjoyed  as  but  one  form  more  of  poHtical  privilege. 
Moral  and  spiritual  ideas  were  lifted  out  of  their  pre- 
viously national  or  racial  setting — a  man  must  choose 
his  faith,  and  choose  it  as  his  most  precious  and  intimate 
concern.  All  reUgions  of  the  time  bear  this  stamp  of 
private  and  yet,  in  principle,  universal  interest.  The 
mysteries  were  celebrated  not  for  any  given  State  or  city, 
but  in  order  to  save  and  edify  voluntary  worshippers, 
who  had  selected  the  cult  by  personal  decision.  Priests, 
no  longer  mere  officials,  gave  themselves  to  the  cure  of 
souls.  Brotherhoods  collected  round  the  mystic  cults 
were  held  together  not  by  ties  of  blood  but  by  a  profoundly 
rehgious  fellow-feeUng :  common  experiences  made  the 
members  fratres  carissimi.^  In  these  sects  and  societies 
which  flourished  in  Greece  and  nearer  Asia  after  the  days 
of  Alexander  the  Great,  men  counted  just  as  men,  and 
the  honours  of  the  society  no  less  than  its  privileges  were 
shared  by  merchants,  soldiers,  freedmen,  and,  at  all  events 
in  the  West,  slaves.  Through  all  ran  the  deep  craving 
for  a  Divine  voice  speaking  to  the  single  heart. 

Christianity  came  out  to  meet  this  movement,  to  accept 
its  challenge,  to  fulfil  its  premonition,  to  complete  its 
partial,  insecure  achievement.  Offering  a  new  disclosure 
of  God,  it  set  forth  a  new  thought  of  man's  primary  relation 
to  Him  and  free  right  of  access  to  His  presence.  In  the 
Gospel,  the  sense  of  individuahty,  reahsed  in  the  brother- 
hood of  a  social  redemption,  rises  to  its  highest  point. 
'  What  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  himself  ?  '  said 
Jesus,  preaching  the  Kingdom.  He  could  not  reveal 
what  man  is  for  God  without  reveahng  simultaneously 
what  man  is  by  intrinsic  constitution — his  Hkeness  to 
the  Father,  his  illimitable  worth,  his  infinite  moral  nature, 
his  eternal  destiny.  It  has  been  said  truly  that  '  the 
world  was  not  sure  of  the  nature  of  personaUty  till  Christ 

^  It  is  rather  a  new  point  in  Christianity  that  the  heathen  outsider  u 
admitted  to  Church  meetings  :    1  Cor.  xiv.  16. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  67 

appeared.'  ^  He  Himself  was  the  first  to  exhibit  a  life 
perfectly  individual — ^no  one  else  could  be  mistaken 
for  Jesus — yet  also  completely  universal  in  human  re- 
lationship and  appeal,  the  true  centre  and  rall3ring -point 
of  history ;  a  life  combining  in  unrivalled  unity  quaUties 
which  in  others  seem  hostile  and  incongruous,  but  in 
the  harmony  and  wholeness  of  His  being  appear  as  fused 
in  a  single  and  distinctive  character.  Not  only  so  :  this 
perfect  because  universal  and  redemptive  individuaHty 
is  manifestly  rooted  in,  or  constituted  by,  fellowship 
with  God.  It  is  the  presence  of  the  Divine  Spirit  '  without 
measure '  that  renders  Him  the  sole  example  of  what 
personahty,  at  its  highest,  can  become.  This  ideally 
personal  life,  the  Gospel  teaches,  others  too  may  share 
by  union  with  Christ,  no  longer  as  things,  or  links  in  a 
chain,  but  free  men.  To  have  within  us,  as  the  soul's 
proper  Ufe,  that  very  Spirit  which  formed  the  inmost 
being  of  Jesus,  is  to  have  completeness  of  manhood. 
Hence  it  is  in  no  way  accidental  that  a  worthy  conception 
of  '  personality,'  as  a  free,  growing,  self-determined,  and 
individually-toned  spiritual  Ufe,  is  after  all  a  plant  con- 
fined to  Christian  soil  and  Christian  chmate.  Through 
Jesus'  influence  the  understanding  of  human  experience 
has  come  to  its  own.  It  is  He  that,  in  the  last  resort, 
has  inspired  the  morally  clarified  distinction  of  '  things  * 
and  '  persons.' 

Let  us  now  pass  on  to  something  else.  We  must 
scrutinise  with  care  the  differential  features  of  the 
authentically  Christian  faith  in  Providence — in  the  control 

*  Siramel  well  remarks  that  in  antiquity  the  soul  went  neither  so  far 
beyond  itself  nor  bo  deep  into  itself  as  has  later  been  the  case  owing 
to  the  synthesis,  or  the  antithesis,  of  the  Christian  feeling  for  life  and 
the  modern  conception  of  nature  and  history.  Christianity,  let  us  further 
note,  was  the  first  religion  to  teach  (what  later  centuries  forgot,  then 
denied)  that  this  full  conception  of  personality  is  predicable  of  women 
equally  with  men.  The  fall  of  Mithraism,  the  Church's  much  most  formid- 
able rival,  may  in  large  measure  be  traced  to  the  strict  exclusion  of  women 
from  its  ceremonies  (c£.  Oumout,  Lea  Myeteres  de  Mithra,  p.  183). 


68       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

of  all  things,  that  is,  by  a  Loving  Wisdom  identical  in 
quality  with  the  mind  of  Jesus  Christ.  Our  Lord  bids 
the  disciples  put  care  away  because  the  Father  knows 
all  we  need  ;  St.  Paul,  with  a  deep  confidence  which  he 
owed  directly  to  Christ,  declares  that  all  things  work 
together  for  good  to  those  that  love  God.  It  has  been 
contended  that  we  have  here  only  the  reaffirmation  of 
truth  famiUar  long  before.  '  The  new  rehgion,'  writes 
Farrer,  '  added  absolutely  nothing  new  on  the  subject  to 
the  teaching  we  still  find  in  Plato  or  Gcero  .  .  .  nothing 
to  the  sure  guidance  of  Ufe  or  to  the  consolations  for 
its  evils.'  ^  And  indeed  Seneca  and  Epictetus  speak  in 
the  most  impressive  terms  about  the  supreme  all-seeing 
providence  of  Deity,  as  well  as  the  perfect  trust  in  that 
good  and  wise  control  which  befits  the  sage.  Seneca  says  : 
'  What  was  for  our  benefit,  God,  who  is  also  our  Father, 
placed  ready  for  our  hand.'  ^  And  Epictetus'  saying 
is  well  known  :  '  What  else  can  I  do,  a  lame  old  man, 
but  sing  hymns  to  God  ?  '  Ostensibly  nothing  could  be 
more  Christian  ;  nothing  in  fact  is  more  Christian,  up  to 
a  point. 

And  yet  the  great  faith  we  owe  to  Jesus  Christ  is  a 
profounder  and  more  transcendent  thing. ^  Undoubtedly 
Stoicism  and  modern  Christianity  have  much,  very  much, 
in  common,  for  in  our  day  the  mechanism  of  the  universe 
has  been  allowed  to  interpose  itself  between  man  and  God, 
with  a  quite  new  inexorabihty.  We  have  caged  ourselves 
in  the  prison  of  '  the  laws  of  Nature,'  a  prison  with  im- 
penetrable walls  ;  and  our  thoughts  concerning  prayer 
and  the  free  intercourse  of  God  and  man  have  inevitably 
suffered.  Thus  we  have  drifted  far  from  Jesus'  view  of 
the  Father — His  omnipotence.  His  providential  ubiquity, 
His  accessibleness.  His  freedom  to  protect  and  save  His 
children,  His  redeeming  power  not  over  the  soul's  inward 

»  Op.  cit.,  pp.  30,  47.  ^  Ep.  110. 

'  The  metaphysical  dualism  of  God  and  Satan — what  has  been  called 
the  Ormuzd  and  Ahriman  view  of  life — must  not  be  canied  back  to  Jesua. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  69 

life  merely  but  over  the  concrete  circumstance  of  the 
world.  But  the  mind  of  Jesus  and  the  Stoic  philosophy 
are  poles  asxmder.  In  the  first  place,  to  the  Stoic  thinker 
Providence  invariably  contains  a  hint,  and  more  than  a 
hint,  of  unseeing  implacable  Fate.  It  is,  in  Apuleius' 
phrase,  a  fatalis  dispositio.  The  great  goddess  Tyche 
looms  over  the  whole  Hellenistic  age.^  Seneca  states 
explicitly  that  physical  phenomena  go  their  way  altogether 
withorut  regard  to  Providence.  In  Marcus  Aurelius 
the  discrete  parts  of  the  world,  i.e.  particular  events, 
are  abandoned  to  the  usurper  Fortune.  The  Divine 
care  of  men  is  frequently  delegated  to  angels  or  demons. 
Many  held  that  Providence,  however  real,  was  such  as  to 
make  prayer  unmeaning.  Maximus  of  Tyre  is  later  than 
our  period — he  flourished  in  the  second  century  a.d. — 
but  his  words  are  typical  enough  :  '  He  that  prays  either 
is  worthy  of  the  things  he  prays  for,  or  he  is  not.  If 
he  is,  he  will  obtain  them,  even  though  he  does  not  pray  ; 
and  if  he  is  not,  he  will  not  obtain  them,  even  though 
he  prays.'  Secondly,  the  predominating  Stoic  temper 
is  that  not  of  joyful  trust  in  God  but  of  sad  brave  resigna- 
tion, coupled  at  times  with  a  lofty  self -righteousness, 
which,  as  occasionally  in  the  Psalms,  puts  God  Himself 
on  trial.  The  dying  sage,  writes  Seneca,  will  say  to  God  : 
'  Have  I  transgressed  Thy  commandments  ?  Have  I 
used  amiss  the  means  Thou  gavest  me  ?  Have  I  ever 
blamed  Thee  ?  Have  I  ever  found  fault  with  Thy  govern- 
ment ?  And  now  dost  Thou  wish  me  to  depart  from  Thy 
assembly  ?  I  depart,  giving  Thee  all  thanks  that  Thou 
hast  thought  me  worthy  to  partake  in  Thy  festival.'  ^ 

No  one  can  be  insensible  to  the  dignity  and  pathos 
of  such  language,  but  neither  is  it  the  language  of  the 
specifically  Christian  mind.  Apart  from  the  suggestion 
that  the  dying  sage  is  on  the  eve  of  separation  from  Grod 

*  Prof.  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy  points  out  to  me  that  even  Philo  says  {Quia 
Rer,  Div.  Haer.,  300) :  '  It  is  a  help  to  the  weaker  to  suppose  that  Moses 
Wfiap/xivTjv  Kal  'At>dyKij¥  ii)S  alriai  tum  ytyofxiyup  airivTUf  elffdyei.' 

■  Di90<mrtu,  iii.  6. 


70       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lkc3T. 

the  difference,  I  think,  may  be  put  in  this  way,  that 
whereas  Stoicism  pronounces  the  universe  to  be  reasonable, 
but  without  ascribing  to  this  reasonableness  any  positive 
content,  Christianity  holds  with  assurance  that  we  see 
a  decisive  index  of  the  purpose  resident  in  all  things  when 
we  look  at  the  Love  manifest  in  Jesus.  Its  faith  in  Pro- 
vidence, to  put  it  otherwise,  is  simply  the  converse  of 
its  faith  in  Redemption  ;  the  two  so  indissolubly  and 
organically  one  that,  if  either  be  amputated,  the  other 
slowly  bleeds  to  death. ^  The  same  Father  who  saves! 
the  world  at  the  cost  of  Jesus  is  He  who  omnipotently 
guides  the  world,  and  the  single  lives  within  the  world, 
to  a  blessed  end.  Providence  is  correlative  to  the  Cross. 
It  is  for  this  reason  that  non-Christian  Uterature  could 
really  show  no  parallel  to  the  eighth  chapter  of  Romans. 

All  this  has  an  intimate  bearing  on  the  emotional  at- 
mosphere by  which  rehgious  aspirations  were,  before 
Christ,  upheld  and  pervaded.  The  New  Testament  is 
the  most  hopeful  book  ever  written,  but  contemporary 
pagan  writing  may  fairly  be  described  as  dark  with  an 
ever-deepening  shadow  of  pessimism.  The  first  century 
B.C.  is  an  exceptionally  depressing  age.  Good  men 
succumbed  to  melancholy ;  others  regarded  the  world 
as  a  bad  jest.  Mankind  seemed  drifting  to  moral  ruin. 
Weariness  of  life  overtook  the  best  minds,  and  the  sombre 
conviction  that  the  universe  is  fundamentally  bad  and 
must  steadily  grow  worse  became  almost  an  article  of 
faith.  A  long  history  lay  behind  this  pessimism.  From 
Plato  down  to  Philo,  and  later,  man  is  a  fallen  being ; 
but,  and  this  is  the  real  point,  the  fall  is  conceived  as  so 
entirely  identical  with  existence  as  such  that  the  only 
possible  escape  is  Uberation  from  the  body.*  We  en- 
counter the  same  junction  of  pessimism  and  moral  languor 
in   the   rehgious   thought   of   India.    Hellenistic   despair 

^  To  have  made  this  clear  is  one  of  Ritschl's  greatest  merits. 
'  Socrates  says  in  the  Phaedo  :   '  Having  got  rid  of  the  fooUahnesi  of 
the  body,  we  shall  be  pure.' 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  71 

flowed  chiefly  from  contemporary  Fatalism,  which 
taught  that  pain  and  evil — and  they  form  the  staple 
of  human  life — come  by  the  inscrutable  appointment 
of  bUnd  supernal  forces.  We  are  startled  to  find  a  writer 
like  Epictetus  still  paying  homage  to  this  cheerless  notion 
of  a  Destiny  which  is  not  merely  deaf  to  human  cries, 
but  forces  its  implacable  decrees  on  the  gods  themselves. 
Seneca  too  argues  that  the  Deity  has  ordained  all  things 
by  unchangeable  law,  which  He  has  indeed  established, 
but  to  which  He  nevertheless  bows.  Looking  closer, 
we  can  see  that  FataUsm  was  vitally  related  to  Oriental 
astral  lore  ;  in  the  vivid  words  of  Professor  Gilbert  Murray, 
'  astrology  fell  upon  the  Hellenistic  mind  as  a  new  disease 
falls  upon  some  remote  island  people.'  ^  It  was  believed  that 
a  man's  entire  destiny  hung  upon  the  star  presiding  over 
his  nativity ;  and  national  fortunes  were  not  merely  fore- 
shadowed, but  profoundly  affected,  by  the  course  of 
meteors  and  comets.  In  a  word,  the  pall  of  astrological 
pantheism  brooded  on  the  world.  Individuals  felt  them- 
selves to  be  only  cog-wheels  in  the  vast  universal 
mechanism  ;  they  bowed  their  heads,  dizzijed  and  appalled 
by  conditions  equally  dreary  and  unavoidable,  under 
cosmic  agencies  of  undiscriminating  rigour.  Still  craving 
freedom,  they  turned  to  magic,  to  those  Egyptian  spells 
and  mystic  groupings  of  numerals  by  which  it  was  hoped 
to  intimidate  or  cajole  the  gods,  or  to  enUst  the  services 
of  the  innumerable  circumambient  hordes  of  demons. 
Such  demons  perpetually  interfered  with  the  details 
of  hfe,  imparted  oracles,  and  cured  disease.  Even 
Posidonius — that  amazing  philosopher-wizard — peoples  the 
atmosphere  with  their  mazy  flights. 

Many  higher  minds,  it  is  true,  had  long  discarded  these 
futihties.  But  new  enfightenments  often  keep  old  super- 
stition aHve  beside  them  ;  and  in  any  case,  the  deeply 
fatahstic  and  nobly  hopeless  temper  of  Stoicism, ^  in  which 


*  Four  Stages  o/  Greek  Religion,  p.  125. 

•  It  has  been  said  that  the  Stoic  view  of 


the  universe  is  not  unfairly 


72       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

stronger  men  took  refuge,  may  be  gathered  from  its  famous 
doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Recurrence.  This  view,  which  has 
its  counterpart  in  the  modem  philosophy  of  Nietzsche, 
presents  the  movement  of  the  world  as  circular  ;  every- 
thing happens  over  and  over  again.  Beyond  each  period 
of  temporary  unification,  as  Mr.  Bevan  puts  it,  '  the 
Stoic  forecast  the  beginning  of  another  world -process 
which  would  follow  exactly  the  same  course  as  the  present 
one  and  end,  like  it,  in  the  one  Fire.  And  so  on  for  ever — 
for  the  present  process  was  one  of  an  infinite  recurrent 
series — an  everlasting,  unvarjdng  round.'  *  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  doctrine  is  sheerly  incongruous  with  any 
philosophy  which,  like  Stoicism,  takes  the  world  to  be 
guided  by  reasonable  purpose  ;  but  there  the  doctrine  is, 
and  its  utter  pessimism  goes  without  saying.  A  system 
culminating  in  any  such  eschatology  differs  radically  and 
in  fundamental  moral  character  from  the  great  faith 
which  asserts  that  Christ  must  reign  until  He  has  put 
all  enemies  under  His  feet.  Eternal  Recurrence  is  parted 
by  the  whole  diameter  of  being  from  the  certain  hope 
of  a  perfect  Kingdom  of  God. 

These  ideas  of  Creation,  of  Man,  and  of  Providence 
form  part  of  the  vital  framework  on  which  the  Christian 
view  of  God  and  the  world  is  built  up  ;  and  in  various 
cardinal  aspects,  as  we  have  seen,  they  overstep  the  highest 
intuitions  of  non-Christian  thought.  They  are  indis- 
solubly  bound  up  with  the  conviction  that  in  Jesus  Christ 
we  confront  the  saving  causal  agency  of  a  Holy  and  Loving 
God  ;  and  we  have  now  to  inquire  how  much  is  new  and 
distinctive  in  this  Christian  idea  of  sal \  -on  as  a  Divine 
work.  In  what  follows  we  shall  have  to  take  careful 
account  of  points  at  which  the  Gospel  of  redemption 

represented  by  the  epi§:ram  :  The  world  is  the  best  of  all  possible  worlds, 
and  everything  in  it  is  a  necessary  evil.'  Compare  the  sad  courage  of 
Marcus  Aurelius. 

*  Stoics  and  Sceptics,  p.  61.  The  same  notion  appears  in  Aristotle, 
and  as  the  truly  original  cannot  occur  more  than  once,  it  almost  Iook» 
as  if  the  Greek  mind  scarcely  contained  the  idea  of  originality. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  73 

proclaimed  by  Christianity  is  richer  even  than  the  prophetic 
faith  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Christianity  is  roughly  definable  as  the  religion  which 
holds,  as  its  fundamental  tenet,  that  in  the  historic  person, 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  God  has  been  perfectly  revealed  as 
Father.  For  just  this  truth  the  human  mind  had  been 
prepared. 1  In  Hellenism,  for  example,  the  belief  is  not 
infrequent  that  great  men  are  the  most  convincing  of  all 
signs  of  a  Divine  power  operating  in  human  affairs  ;  an 
idea,  it  is  true,  only  imperfectly  ethicised  at  that  stage. 
Pythagoras  and  Plato  were  held  to  be  inspired.  Also 
it  is  taught,  by  Eclecticism  amongst  other  schools,  that 
immediate  knowledge  of  God  may  be  acquired  by  resort 
to  primitive  religious  tradition  or  through  direct  revelation, 
But  such  revelation  is  for  the  most  part  sought  in  ecstasy, 
in  mystic  escape  from  the  life  of  the  senses,  or  in  the 
authority  of  holy  books.  Later  Greek  thought  rather  felt 
a  yearning  for  revelation  than  professed  to  have  found 
it.  In  truth,  this  desire  for  a  direct  acquaintance  with 
God  could  receive  no  satisf3dng  or  self -accrediting  answer 
from  any  other  sphere  than  history.  History  is  the  field 
of  reahty  in  which  we  five  the  characteristically  human 
life,  and  through  it  must  be  mediated  the  final  and  con- 
clusive truth. 

We  thus  recapture  an  idea  on  which  I  dwelt  for  a  single 
moment  at  the  close  of  the  last  lecture.  No  religion  but 
that  of  the  Bible  presents,  as  a  doctrine  on  which  it  risks 
everything,  the  behef  that  God  is  essentially  active  WiU, 
a  Will  self -expressed  in  history  with  that  moral  purpose 
and  significance  which  we  can  sum  up  as  Holy  Love.  In 
Greece  and  India,  as  indeed  everywhere  outside  Scripture 
with  the  partial  exception  of  Zoroastrianism,  this  vast 
and  decisive  truth  is  obscured  from  the  outset  by  the 

*  '  The  very  idea  that  an  intermediary  is  necessary,  a  mediator  between 
Qod  and  man,  constituted  for  the  ancient  mind  a  real  propaedeutic  for 
Christianity  '  (J.  R6ville,  La  Religion  a  Rome  sotia  les  Siverea,  p.  290). 


74       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lbot. 

initial,  and  fundamentally  speculative,  assumption  that 
history,  in  the  last  resort,  is  unreal.  Facts,  events,  and 
persons  are  at  most  phenomenal  and  fortuitous.  They 
are  the  accidents  or  incidents  of  time  ;  it  is  ab  initio 
reckoned  absurd — savouring  in  truth  of  grossness — to 
imagine  that  faith  in  God  can  in  any  proper  sense  depend 
on  what  is  thus  illusory  and  evanescent.  Only  a 
materiaUstic  West,  the  East  would  say,  could  propose 
SLiiything  of  the  kind.  Reahty,  authentic  being,  is  eternally 
unchanging.  Whatever  really  is,  is  and  must  be  eternal ; 
temporal  facts  are  unreal.  This  estimate  of  what  we  may 
call  the  ontological  status  of  history  must  date,  I  suppose, 
from  inconceivably  remote  ages,  for  it  presupposes  a  quite 
undeveloped  view  of  personahty,  and  is  uniformly  inspired 
by  pantheistic  and  even  acosmic  modes  of  thought.^ 

Where  was  the  corrective  to  be  found,  a  corrective 
absolutely  needful  if  Hfe  was  to  be  built  on  moral  facts, 
not  imaginative  sentiment  or  cosmological  inductions  ? 
It  was  early  suppHed  by  the  great  Hebrew  prophets.  They 
first  came  forward  with  the  message  that  the  Living 
Grod  is  executing  a  purpose  in  the  world — a  purpose  which 
can  be  truly  called  moral,  redemptive,  imiversal,  un- 
conquerable. History,  just  because  it  is  moral  to  the 
core,  is  more  profoundly  real  than  anything  else.  Once 
this  is  understood,  egoistic  or  mystic  individuaUsm  is 
forbidden  to  the  behever.  Prophetic  faith  challenges 
him  to  take  part  in  a  world -struggle  between  God  and 
evil,  and  rehgion  henceforward  ceases  to  lament  a  lost 
golden  age  Ijdng  remotely  in  the  past,  for  in  its  new  con- 
sciousness of  the  increasing  purpose  of  the  ages  it  now 
bends  its  eye  upon  a  glorious  future.     Eschatology  becomes 

»  Plato's  myths  are  a  sort  of  taeit  confession  that  religioug  ideaa,  for 
complete  or  at  least  completely  convincing  truth,  demeind  historical 
embodiment.  The  specific  kind  of  reality  which  we  call  history  has 
never  had  justice  from  philosophers.  All  the  standard  works  on  epistem- 
ology,  for  example,  deal  fully  with  questions  like  '  How  do  I  know  this 
table  to  be  red  or  square  ?  *  but  such  questions  as  '  How  do  I  know,  what 
is  involved  in  my  knowing,  that  Jiilius  Ca«s&r  died  oa  tb©  Idoa  of  Maroli  t  * 
are  totally  neglected. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  75 

an  ethical  thing,  for  trust  in  a  good  and  almighty  God 
vouches  for  the  progress  of  His  righteous  cause.  Now 
it  is  one  of  the  most  distinctive  features  of  Christianity 
that  it  carries  on,  and,  if  possible,  accentuates,  this  older 
thought  of  '  God  in  history.'  Marcion's  well-meant  effort 
to  cut  the  Gospel  loose  from  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as 
modem  attempts  to  isolate  Jesus  Christ  from  the  con- 
tinuous process  of  revelation  within  which  He  stands, 
result  from  a  failure  to  perceive  that  Christianity  em- 
phatically takes  sides  on  the  question  whether  reUgion  and 
history  are  inseparably  linked  together.  It  puts  its  whole 
weight  on  the  beHef  that  the  two  are  indissociable.  Far 
from  being  a  side-issue,  this  is  quite  Hterally  a  matter  of 
life  and  death.  According  to  BibUcal  faith,  from  the 
prophets  onward,  the  chief  thing  in  religion  is  what  God 
does,  viz.  seek  unweariedly  to  redeem  His  children 
through  historical  experiences.  According  to  Greek  and 
Indian  mysticism,  on  the  other  hand,  the  chief  thing  in 
religion  is  what  man  does,  viz.,  avert  his  eyes  from  historic 
fact,  and  plunge  a  suppressed  self  in  the  moving,  changeless 
impersonal  Divine.  That  is  no  minor  difference  ;  it  is 
a  radical  difference  of  type.  Hence  the  fundamental 
Christian  conviction,  that  God  has  been  authentically 
revealed  through  the  experience  of  a  real  historical  person, 
of  whose  life  and  character  a  genuine  record  has  been 
preserved,  while  certainly  it  points  to  a  new  fact — the  fact 
of  Jesus  Christ — involves  no  new  principle.  What  we 
now  have  is  only  the  supreme  instance  of  revelation  in  the 
medium  of  concrete  history,  as  set  forth  by  the  prophets. 

This  absolutely  constitutive  sense  of  fact  meets  the 
reader  of  the  New  Testament  at  every  point.  Jesus 
Himself  made  no  secret  of  His  behef  that  He  was  engaged 
in  inaugurating  the  Messianic  era,  that  in  Him  God  had 
visited  and  redeemed  His  people.  '  Blessed,'  He  said 
in  one  of  the  most  significant  words  He  ever  spoke,  '  are 
your  eyes,  for  they  see  ;  and  your  ears,  for  they  hear. 
For  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  many  prophets  and  righteous 


76       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

men  have  desired  to  see  those  things  which  ye  see,  and 
have  not  seen  them  ;  and  to  hear  those  things  which  ye 
hear,  and  have  not  heard  them.'  ^  He  congratulates 
the  disciples  on  Uving  in  His  day.  In  Him  something 
had  come  into  the  world  that  made  His  generation  enviable 
in  comparison  with  the  past.  We  can  imagine  no  more 
distinct  assertion  of  the  truth  that  reaUty — the  supreme 
aspect  of  reality  which  we  speak  of  as  God's  relation  to 
man — so  far  from  being  essentially  unchanging,  is  both 
susceptible  of  development  and  is  actually  being  developed, 
inasmuch  as  history  in  its  advance  is  positively  adding 
to  the  significance  of  the  data  present  to  the  religious  mind. 
The  world  is  a  new  place  now  that  Christ  has  come.  The 
apostles  echo  this  great  note.  They  are  wonderingly 
aware  that  events  have  happened  that  make  all  things 
new,  and  engender  a  new  joyful  sense  of  emancipation. 
The  load  of  self,  of  the  world,  of  statutory  religion  has  been 
lifted  off  ;  they  Hve  in  a  spirit  not  of  fear  but  sonship, 
not  of  mere  aspiration  but  possession.  The  destroying 
powers  of  evil  have  been,  in  principle,  quelled.  Jesus, 
mighty  to  save,  had  not  been  there  before,  and  He  is 
there  now.  These  are  not  simply  the  edifying  reflections 
of  the  devout ;  they  are  facts,  for  which  room  must  be 
found  in  the  most  rigorously  scientific  History  of  ReHgions  ; 
and  it  is  futile  to  try  and  interpret  Christianity,  or  compare 
it  with  other  faiths,  except  as  we  take  them  into  account. 
Thus  we  are  brought  up  against  the  crucial  truth,  which, 
I  should  think,  every  missionary  who  has  insisted  on  facing 
these  problems  must  have  formulated  to  his  own  mind, 
that  eventually  the  distinctive  fact  in  Christianity  is 
Christ.  It  is  an  idea  to  which  our  discussion  naturally 
reverts  at  intervals,  since  its  ramifications  are  many ; 
but  I  now  wish  to  consider  it  more  carefully,  and  to  ask 
exactly  how  the  personaUty  of  Christ  gives  the  Christian 
religion  a  place  of  its  own,  as  the  highest  of  all  theocentrio 
faiths.    Three  points  ought  to  have  prominence. 

>  Matt.  xiii.  16-17. 


lu.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  77 

(1)  The  personality  of  Jesus  Christ  belongs  to  history, 
not  myth.  When  we  ask  the  precise  reason  why 
Christianity  prevailed  as  a  world-rehgion,  whereas  the 
hero -cults  of  antiquity  have  so  utterly  perished  that 
to-day  they  have  no  votaries  at  all,  the  answer  to  a  great 
extent  Hes  in  the  circumstance  that  Dionysus,  Herakles, 
Attis,  and  the  like  were  purely  legendary  figures  impossible 
to  locaHse  in  any  situation  known  to  have  been  historically 
real,  but  Jesus  Christ  Hved  and  died.  His  rivals  failed 
to  appear  within  the  Usts  of  time.  No  witnesses  came 
forward  testifying  that  they  had  associated  with  Serapis 
or  Isis  in  life's  common  ways,  had  Ustened  to  their  words, 
or  made  acquaintance  with  their  character  and  found  that 
their  hfe  answered  consistently  to  their  doctrine.  Jesus, 
on  the  contrary,  was  presented  in  the  personal  testimony 
of  those  who  had  known  Him.  '  That  which  we  have  seen 
and  heard  declare  we  unto  you.'  Built  thus  on  the  actual, 
His  Gospel  could  outlast  the  storms  of  speculation.  The 
soil  of  fact,  to  which  its  roots  went  down,  afforded  stability 
and  growth  and  ever  renewed  vigour.  It  has  occasionally 
been  complained  that  the  Jesus  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 
might,  except  for  a  trifling  historical  reference  Hke  the 
mention  of  Pontius  Pilate,  be  quite  well  identified  or  at 
least  co-ordinated  with  any  of  the  contemporary  nature- 
deities,  say  the  Babylonian  Tammuz.  But  even  in  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  in  spite  of  its  not  over-successful  attempts 
to  identify  Jesus  in  a  fashion  satisfactory  to  the  Christian 
mind,  the  strongest  emphasis  is  laid  on  history  ;  and  in  the 
New  Testament,  especially  the  Gospels,  the  first  interest 
of  every  writer  is  beyond  dispute  in  facts.  A  deep  gulf 
therefore  separates  Jesus  from  mythic  sun-gods  or  deities 
of  vegetation,  whose  alleged  experiences  are  but  imaginative 
transcripts  of  natural  processes  interpreted  as  the  fortunes 
or  adventures  of  gods  and  goddesses  who,  Uke  leaves  or 
grass,  die  in  winter  to  revive  again  in  spring.  This  is  to 
say  nothing  of  the  rude,  foul,  or  unintelligible  elements 
which  these  mythic  stories  may  contain. 


78       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [l»ot. 

In  certain  ways  a  difference  not  less  striking  obtains 
between  the  Christian  knowledge  of  Jesus  and  the  Jewish 
anticipative  pictures  of  Messiah.  When,  in  prophecy 
or  apocalypse,  Jewish  thought  drew  the  outlines  of  the 
Coming  One,  this  form,  being  as  it  was  the  offspring  of 
fancy  and  to  a  considerable  extent  the  combination  of 
theological  abstractions,  could  have  no  vivid  or  concrete 
life.  Each  detail  was  a  guess.  But  the  Synoptists,  or 
the  earlier  narrators  on  whom  they  rely,  drew  Tvdth  their 
eye  upon  the  object.  They  give  the  hving,  tangible 
impression  of  One  known  and  loved,  admired,  venerated, 
obeyed.  The  Coming  One  was  no  longer  hypothetical 
in  character  ;  he  was  definitely  real,  for  he  was  Jesus. 
Of  the  two  terms,  Messiah  and  Jesus,  it  is  the  second 
that  represents  the  known,  and  that  accordingly  gives 
its  value  to  the  first,  not  the  other  way  about.  Whatever 
the  influence  exerted  on  Christology — and  that  it  was  a 
powerful  influence  cannot  be  questioned — by  pre-existing 
Messianic  categories,  the  early  Christian  mind  was  never 
occupied  by  a  purely  ideal  form,  but  by  a  real  historical 
person  whose  actuahty  scattered  hke  mist  the  vision- 
like constructions  of  uncontrolled  imagery.  The  force 
of  history  prevailed. 

(2)  The  History  of  Religions  contains  no  parallel  to  the 
self -consciousness  of  Jesus.  Unless  we  toss  the  Gospels 
overboard,  it  is  certain  that  our  Ix^rd's  attitude  to  God, 
to  men,  and  to  His  own  significance  for  the  world  is  an 
unprecedented  attitude.  \^Tiat  we  know  of  Buddha  or 
Mohammed,  to  take  the  chief  examples,  shows  nothing 
in  the  least  analogous  to  His  sense  of  Divine  sonship,  His 
experience  of  God's  love.  His  perfect  fulfilment  of  vocation. 
Here  of  course  we  are  touching  upon  matters  which  cannot 
ultimately  be  decided  by  purely  disinterested  science, 
since  they  involve  personal  values,  and  these  the  very 
highest.  Hence  I  will  only  say  that  unquestionably  Jesus 
seems  to  conceive  of  salvation  as  dependent  on  Himself ; 
He  seems  to  call  men  less  to  His  teaching  than  to  His  own 


lu.J  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  79 

person  as  the  embodiment  and  guarantee  of  the  truth 
He  proclaims  ;  He  seems  impUcitly  to  take  God's  place 
in  relation  to  the  soul,  and  to  make  personal  devoted  love 
to  Him  the  equivalent  of  faith  in  the  redemptive  sense 
of  the  word.  He  seems  to  do  all  these  things,  and  I  find 
no  reason  to  doubt  that  actually  He  did  them.  But 
nothing  in  the  least  resembhng  this  is  characteristic  of 
the  method  pursued  by  the  great  religious  teachers.  No 
other  religious  leader  can  be  named  who  displays  a  tendency 
to  identify  with  himself  the  truth  proclaimed  by  him,  or 
to  claim  that  in  him  revelation  is  so  focussed  and  con- 
centrated as  to  be  charged  with  power  to  save.  In  the 
case  of  Jesus,  however.  His  conscious  sonship  is  felt  by 
Him  to  be  the  supreme  reahty  ;  and  in  the  Hght  of  it  He 
recognised  clearly  the  work  God  had  laid  upon  Him.  It 
was  not  that  He  knew  Himself  as  Messiah,  and  from  this 
rose  to  the  certainty  that  God  was  His  Father  ;  the  con- 
nection of  the  two  facts  is  just  the  opposite.  He  is  Son 
of  Man,  visible  Head  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  in  virtue 
of  the  still  deeper  consciousness  that  He  is  Son  of  God. 
The  roots  of  His  vocation  he  in  the  uniqueness  of  His 
relation  to  the  Father.  But  eventually  we  cannot  separate 
these  two  aspects.  The  higher  in  the  scale  of  being  a 
human  character  may  stand,  the  more  completely  vocation 
and  personaHty  coincide,  and  in  the  case  of  Jesus  the 
coincidence  was  absolute.  '  It  is,  in  fact,  the  differentia 
of  Christianity  as  a  rehgion,'  writes  Denney,  '  that  the 
distinction  which  can  sometimes  be  drawn  between  a 
person  and  the  cause  for  which  he  stands  is  in  it  no  longer 
valid.'  1 

I  believe  that  the  self -consciousness  of  Jesus  has  never 
been  taken  seriously  by  the  scientific  History  of  Rehgions. 
That  science  has  indeed  put  us  under  so  heavy  a  debt 
that  it  may  seem  ungrateful  to  accuse  it  of  misleading 
us ;  its  undoubted  tendency,  however,  has  been  to  regard 
Jesus'  conception  of  Himself  as  either  pathological  megalo- 

*  Hastiaga*  Dictionary  oj  Christ  and  the  Qospela,  vol.  ii.  p.  396. 


80       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

mania  or  the  blindly  adoring  creation  of  later  faith.  In 
truth,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  it  is  the  most  arresting  reality 
in  the  whole  past  of  human  religious  development,  and  no 
historical  discipline  electing  to  ignore  it  can,  in  this  respect, 
rank  as  a  fair  interpretation  of  the  actual  events.  The 
main  productive  and  organising  factor  in  reUgion  as 
we  know  it  to-day  is  the  new  and  mysteriously  creative 
power  manifest  in  Jesus  and  His  conscious  abiUty  to  save 
men. 

(3)  In  Christ  there  is  given  the  personal  presence  of  God, 
in  redeeming  power.  The  term  '  incarnation,'  which  to 
certain  minds  has  recently  become  suspect,  will  no  doubt 
recover  its  place  in  due  course,  since  it  represents  an  idea 
with  which  the  reUgious  mind,  at  its  highest,  cannot  dis- 
pense. We  may  use  it  here  without  concern  to  indicate 
the  fact  that  in  Jesus  Christ,  who  Hved  a  man's  hfe,  we 
confront  the  redemptive  agency  of  God  in  a  degree  that 
transcends  all  we  could  ask  or  think.  Nor  is  incarnation 
only  a  metaphor.  As  Canon  Streeter  has  observed,  '  if 
the  essential,  distinctive,  and  most  fundamental  quahty  of 
the  Spirit  we  call  God  is  love,  this  is  a  quaHty  which  can 
be  exhibited  directly  and  undisguisedly  and  without  any 
admixture  of  symboUsm  and  metaphor  in  a  perfect  human 
life  and  character.'  ^  Christian  faith  is  built  upon  the 
conviction  that  in  Jesus'  Hfe,  death,  and  triumph  the  path- 
way between  the  Father  and  His  human  children  has 
been  opened  up,  and  opened  from  Grod's  side.  We  claim 
for  the  Gospel,  as  a  vital  and  unique  element,  this  perfectly 
moralised  thought  of  mediation  through  incarnate  love. 
Jesus  meets  a  world  of  sin  not  as  the  supreme  prophet 
merely,  but  as  One  fully  aware  that  in  the  relationship 
of  God  and  man  Qverjrthing  turns  upon  Himself. 

Augustine,  reviewing  the  nobler  forms  of  pagan 
mysticism,  selects  this  one  Christian  teaching  of  the  In- 
carnation as  that  which  is  not  foimd  an5rwhere  elae. 
Just  because  the  highest  rehgious  boon  is  now  given— no 

^  Shidmt  Mov&ment  for  May,  1917,  p.  141. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  81 

longer  an  object  of  forward -reaching  hope  but  directly 
experienced  fact — men  are  sure  of  God  in  a  new  degree. 
St.  Paul  and  St.  John  equally  put  this  distinctively 
Christian  triumphant  certainty  at  the  basis  of  all  faith 
and  life.  '  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto 
Himself ;  'He  that  hath  seen  Me  hath  seen  the  Father' — 
words  of  this  quahty,  this  reach,  had  never  before  been 
heard.  Jesus,  it  is  felt,  is  somehow  more  than  the  Father's 
deputy,  or  His  consecrated  instrument  and  interpreter  ; 
He  is  Bearer  and  Embodiment  of  His  on-e  commanding 
purpose,  in  the  Hght  of  which  alone  the  whole  cosmic 
development  becomes  luminous  with  meaning ;  He  is 
medium  of  a  love  so  vast,  so  unconquerable,  that  it  bears 
our  sin  and  puts  it  away  by  the  sacrifice  of  itself.  In 
sending  Jesus,  the  Father  has  really  come  in  person  ; 
when  He  would  not  spare  His  own  Son,  it  was  Himself 
He  refused  to  spare.  If  anything  else  morally  identical 
with  this  exists  in  the  rehgious  evolution  of  mankind, 
I  can  only  say  it  has  not  been  my  fortune  to  encounter 
it.  It  is  moreover  a  conviction  that  gives  a  pecuKar 
tone  to  every  other  Christian  belief  ;  and  it  can  be  held 
and  preached  and  Uved  by  quite  irrespectively  of  any 
explicit  or  articulated  Christology.  When  men  examine 
their  own  sense  of  it,  they  normally  discover  it  to  involve 
an  attitude  towards  Jesus  of  faith  and  worship  which 
definitely  places  Him  on  the  Divine  side  of  reahty.  In 
His  career,  as  ever  more  completely  He  entered  into  the 
responsibilities  and  tragedy  of  our  life,  as  He  took  our 
sin,  in  all  its  desolating  weight,  upon  Himself,  to  suffer 
with  us  in  our  shame,  we  become  aware  that  God  has 
stooped  to  have  a  personal  share  in  our  sorest  need.  To 
this  hour,  just  as  when  the  New  Testament  was  written, 
the  Cross  remains  the  last  and  most  subduing  revelation. 
It  is  in  point  of  fact  invariably  through  the  Cross  that 
believers  have  caught  the  most  convincing  and  over- 
mastering glimpse  of  the  Divine  nature,  as  Holy  Love 
with  the  principle  of  self-sacrifice  at  its  heart ;    and  tha 


82       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

scientific  History  of  Religions,  registering  the  data,  must 
find  a  place  for  this  datum  among  the  rest. 

In  what  respect  is  this  view  of  Mediation  to  be 
discriminated  from  others  of  pre-Christian  origin  ?  It 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  mediation  from  above  is  a 
tolerably  familiar  non-Christian  conception.  As  instances 
we  may  take  the  Worid-soui  of  Plato,  the  Heraclitean, 
Philonic,  and  Stoic  Logos,  the  Hebrew  idea  of  Wisdom, 
or  the  crowding  hierarchies  of  archons  and  aeons  in 
Gnosticism.  But  not  to  speak  of  the  duahstic  view  of 
matter  rendering  it  (except  in  Hebrew  thought)  unworthy 
of  contact  with  Divinity,  it  is  noticeable  that  of  these 
cosmic  intermediaries  none  was  ever  regarded  as  in  any 
sense  identified  with  a  historical  person.  True  and  recog- 
nisable personahty,  in  short,  functioning  ethically  in 
common  human  life,  was  not  yet  acknowledged  as  the 
real  medium  of  revelation.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
mediating  principle  itself  is  plainly  not  essentially  one 
with  Supreme  Godhead,  but  rather  inferior  and  secondary. 
Thus  the  human  craving  for  spiritual  union  with  the  one 
only  God  is  left  unsatisfied.  Neither  can  God  touch 
man,  nor  can  man,  in  touching  the  Mediator,  touch  very 
God.  Christianity,  in  short,  is  the  one  reUgion  known 
to  offer  a  Mediator  who  is  actually  '  of  one  essence  with 
the  Father,'  because  the  Father's  essence  is  love.  In  a 
sense  unattempted  by  any  other  faith,  it  faces  the  moral 
issues  of  reconcihation. 

Incarnation  doubtless  is  an  idea  as  old,  or  very  nearly 
as  old,  as  rehgion  itself.  That  gods,  moved  by  desires 
selfish  or  beneficent,  could  temporarily  assume  human 
form,  was  widely  beheved.  In  Scandinavian,  Greek, 
and  Indian  mythology  this  thought  frequently  recurs  ; 
but  it  really  affords  no  analogy  to  the  Christian  message, 
if  for  no  other  reason  then  for  this,  that  the  presupposed 
idea  of  Grod  is  so  imperfectly  ethical  that  Deity  can 
with  equal  facihty  unite  itself  to  either  human  or  animal 
nature.     In  Hinduism,  for  example,  the  thought  of  incama- 


m]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  83 

tion  is  specially  associated  with  the  god  Vishnu,  who 
during  the  series  of  his  numerous  avataras  may  assume 
the  guise  of  fish  or  tortoise.  If  it  be  repHed  that  he  is 
completely  manifested  in  Krishna,  constituting  in  this 
form  a  full  satisfaction  and  epitome  of  the  cravings  and 
experiences  of  the  Hindu  soul,  we  must  yet  consider 
that  all  this  stands  in  no  positive  relation  to  historic 
fact.  What  the  mythology  does  bear  witness  to  is  the 
need  of  a  personal  Redeemer  operating  within  human 
hfe,  and  through  it  revealing  God  ;  precisely  this  actuahty 
is  lacking.  Krishna,  as  a  self,  is  no  part  of  the  historical 
record,  and  in  the  vague  fantastic  outlines  of  the  picture 
it  is  impossible  for  us  to  envisage  any  authentic  character, 
deeply  based  in  credible  experience.  To  gain  the  world, 
the  truth  of  Grod  as  He  is  must  embody  itself  in  a  tale  of 
moraUy  verifiable  meaning,  with  for  hero  a  seK-accredit- 
ing  personahty. 

The  thought,  then,  of  Divine  self-sacrifice,  interpreted 
in  purely  moral  terms  (except  as  grace  is  not  moral  only, 
but  more)  ranks  as  a  central  and  distinctive  feature  of  the 
Christian  message.  Only  here  is  forgiveness  mediated 
to  the  penitent — as  always  when  man's  pardon  of  man 
is  imparted  nobly — through  the  cost  of  God  the  Forgiver. 
It  is  not,  as  in  old  rehgions,  a  sacrifice  by  which  unfriendly 
Godhead  is  propitiated  and  induced  to  have  mercy  ;  it 
is  sacrifice  made  by  God  Himself  in  free  ilfimitable  love 
through  the  loving  heart  of  Jesus  and  His  fihal  obedience 
even  '  unto  death.'  For  this  we  search  in  vain  elsewhere. 
It  rests  on  a  view  of  God  not  elsewhere  found.  Deity,  as 
it  has  been  put,  is  for  the  Greco-Roman  mind  '  httle  more 
than  an  aristocratic  kind  of  immortal  being.  A  Divine 
Being  manifested  in  poverty  and  weakness  is  an  entirely 
new  idea.'  ^ 

But  how  if  Christianity  only  borrowed  the  Oriental 
myth  of  '  the  dying  and  rising  god  '  ?  It  is  surely  notorious 
that  in  the  first  century  the  story  of  a  Divine  persoa 

A  Straohan,  Individuality  of  St,  Fault  p.  77. 


84       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lecTv 

who  dies  and  is  restored  to  life  enjoyed  wide  currency, 
and,  in  a  variety  of  forms,  inspired  the  behef  and  practice 
of  different  Hellenistic  mystery -rehgions.  What  is  the 
Pauline  Grospel  but  a  variant  of  this  romantic  symboHsm  ?  ^ 
This  is  all  the  more  plausible  that  no  one  will  deny  that 
the  apostle's  mind  may  well  have  been  stimulated  to 
analyse  the  meaning  of  Christ  more  carefully  by  great 
ideas  afloat  in  the  contemporary  reUgious  atmosphere. 
But  we  must  call  in  a  sane  criticism.  To  begin  with,  the 
pagan  thought  of  a  god  who  could  die  and  rise  again 
is  pure  polytheism ;  secondly,  by  slurring  the  actual 
details  of  the  myths  we  may  easily  overlook  their  curiously 
unmoral  character.  '  It  is  of  supreme  importance,' 
says  Professor  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  '  to  notice  that  the 
central  deities  in  this  sphere  of  rehgion,  Osiris  (-Serapis), 
Attis,  and  Dionysus,  are  intimately  connected  with  the 
growth  and  decay  of  vegetation.  Isis  and  Cybele  are 
each  represented  as  mourning  her  beloved,  just  as  Demeter 
at  Eleusis  mourns  for  her  daughter,  Kore,  with  whom  at 
a  later  period  Dionysus  (lacchus)  was  brought  into  close 
affinity.'  *  In  short,  the  mjrths  were  nature-myths  ;  they 
had  no  connection  with  Divine  self -surrender  to  death 
for  man's  ethical  good  ;  and  though  unquestionably  they 
gradually  became  refined  and  morahsed,  the  process  in 
the  first  century  a.d.  was  far  from  being  complete.  Also 
I  am  bound  to  point  out  that  scholars  of  the  rank  of  Wemle, 
Moffatt,  and  Schweitzer  openly  doubt  whether  in  the  first 
century  there  so  much  as  existed  any  mystery -religion 
centred  upon  the  idea  of  a  Redeemer-God ;  i.e.  as 
Schweitzer  dryly  defines  it,  '  a  Grod  who  for  the  sake  of 
men  came  into  the  world,  died,  and  rose  again.'  Wernle 
observes  pointedly  that  St.  Paul  would  by  no  means 
have  found  the  Cross  '  foofishness  '  to  the  Greeks,  and 
might   have   spared   many   troublesome   arguments,   had 

*  For  an  excellent  brief  accovint  of  Hellenistic  religion,  bringing  out 
clearly  its  combination  of  dualistie  and  ascetic  mysticism  witL  Greek 
philosophy,  see  Morgan's  Religion  and  Theology  of  Paul,  pp.  124-41. 

■  St.  Paul  and  the  Mystery/' Religions,  pp.  20Q  f. 


ra.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  ^ 

the  hearers  considered  it  perfectly  natural  that  a  Divine 
being  should  rise  from  the  grave. ^  In  any  case,  and 
however  this  controversy  may  finish,  it  is  altogether 
clear  that  no  myth  or  cult  contained  anything  even  re- 
motely analogous  to  the  Cross  of  Jesus.  To  the  writers 
of  the  New  Testament,  it  must  be  remembered,  the  Cross 
has  no  significance  at  all  except  its  moral  significance — 
that  is  to  say,  except  its  intrinsic  character  as  the  last 
expression  of  God's  righteous  love,  and  on  the  other  hand 
the  last  expression  of  Jesus'  fidelity  to  the  Father's  will. 
Nothing  in  the  least  corresponding  to  this  occurs  in  the 
Mysteries.  They  have  not  a  word  to  say  regarding  the 
living  and  dying  experiences  of  the  Sufferer  as  the  medium 
of  an  absolutely  moral  reconciUation  between  God  and 
man. 

Recurring  now  to  the  Old  Testament,  let  us  note  that 
the  story  of  Jesus,  who  in  Divine  love  humbled  Himself 
and  became  obedient  to  death,  transcends  in  its  revealing 
significance  even  the  highest  visions  of  Hebrew  faith. 
Redemption  is  proclaimed  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
proclaimed  as  God's  work  ;  to  this  the  New  Testament 
adds  the  disclosure  of  its  cost.  This  is  really  not  difficult 
to  prove.  The  words  '  broken  for  you,'  which  occur  in 
St.  Paul's  narrative  of  the  institution  of  the  Last  Supper, 
strike  a  note  unfamiHar  to  Jewish  anticipations  of  the 
Messiah.  '  The  idea  of  the  Messianic  sufferings  and 
death,'  it  has  been  said,  '  is  one  that  wakes  no  echo  in 
the  heart  of  any  contemporary  of  our  Lord,  not  even 
excepting  His  disciples.'  ^  St.  Paul,  every  one  knows, 
had  been  compelled  to  modify  his  Messianic  conceptions 
from  end  to  end  by  the  overpowering  fact  of  the  Cross. 
True,  there  was  a  great  passage  in  Isaiah  which  spoke 
of  the  Suffering  Servant  of  Jehovah  ;  and  here,  if  any- 
where, the  future  does  seem  to  be  revealed,  '  because  the 
prophet  has  come  so  near  to  the  moral  centre  ol  life  that 

»  Zeitachrift  fiir  Theologie  und  Kirche,  1915,  p.  44. 
•  Muirhead,  The  Eschatology  of  Jesua,  p.  206. 


86       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

he  discerns  the  Divine  ideas  before  they  begin  to  work  in 
the  world.'  ^  But  from  such  humiKations  the  figure  of  the 
Messiah  was  held  strictly  aloof.  It  was  only  in  the  Hght 
of  history  that  the  daring  forward  step  could  be  taken  of 
combining  the  two  in  one.  The  Messiah  and  the  Suffering 
Servant  were  now  united  in  Christian  faith  because  in  the 
first  instance  they  had  been  united  in  historic  fact — in 
the  revolutionary  experience  of  Jesus. 

Thus  the  Christian  rehgion  stands  by  itself  in  the  ascend- 
ing scale  of  theisms — Greek,  Indian,  even  Hebrew — as  a 
religion  built  on  a  given  reconciHation  between  sinful  man 
and  God's  holy  love,  a  reconciHation  achieved  at  Divine 
cost.  This  is  not  to  entangle  ourselves  in  theories  of 
Atonement ;  I  am  merely  insisting  on  the  fact  that 
Christianity,  and  no  other  faith,  proclaims  a  transcendent 
and  self-abnegating  act  of  Divine  love,  whereby  forgive- 
ness is  put  within  our  reach,  and  once  for  aU  we  have  the 
assurance  of  its  reality.  It  is  true  that  reconciliation 
formed  the  goal  of  hope  for  other  redemptive  refigions. 
But  either  the  impHed  view  of  Grod  is  such  that  it  is  only 
in  a  non-natural  sense  we  can  speak  of  personal  fellowship 
between  Him  and  reconciled  men,  because  He  is  not 
really  a  spiritual  Self ;  or,  even  if  reconciliation  with  the 
Divine  Self  is  regarded  as  possible,  it  ranks  as  something 
to  be  accomplished  by  man,  which  is  as  different  as  night 
from  day  from  the  glorious  good  news  of  God  in  Christ. 
If  we  beheve  that  God  bears  the  load  of  our  sin  and  sorrow, 
putting  them  away  by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself  ;  that  He 
has  spared  Himself  nothing  in  the  effort  to  overcome  our 
hostihty  and  mistrust  ;  that  by  His  love  in  action  He  so 
touches  and  persuades  us  that  we  joyfully  recognise  our- 
selves as  children  of  the  one  Father  and  brethren  of  all 
our  fellows — it  is  to  Christ,  and  to  Him  only,  that  we 
are  indebted  for  this  transfiguring  certainty.  Noble  con- 
ceptions of  the  Divine  sympathy,  as  we  have  seen,  haunt 
the  legends  of  India  and  Greece.     But  to  the  last  they 

*  Qardnery  Evolution  in  Christian  Do^rine,  p.  179. 


m.j  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  87 

are  legends,  and  no  more.  Never  once  do  they  intrude 
into  history — into  the  specific  sphere  and  kind  of  reality, 
that  is,  in  which  we  ourselves  Hve — by  way  of  accom- 
plished saving  fact.  They  represent  no  work  of  God 
achieved  for  us  in  time.  And  therefore  they  are  poorer 
than  the  Gospel  by  just  so  much  as  dream  is  poorer 
than  fact. 

One  point  more.  The  career  of  Jesus,  His  followers 
beUeve,  did  not  terminate  at  the  Cross  :  it  was  perpetuated, 
in  a  changed  and  universahsed  form,  by  His  resurrection 
from  the  dead.  This  element  in  the  Gospel  is  cardinal. 
The  first  followers  of  Jesus  took  it  as  their  vocation  to  be 
witnesses  to  this  resurrection,  and,  to  be  exact,  it  was 
not  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  but  the  Risen  Lord,  in  whom 
they  faced  and  overcame  the  world.  Here  also  we  shall 
do  wisely  to  refrain  from  detailed  theory  ;  I  will  assume 
no  more  than  that  after  death  Jesus  revealed  Himself  to 
the  disciples  as  the  Living  One  in  such  ways  as  to  convince 
them  ahke  of  His  identity  and  His  triumph.  It  is 
occasionally  instructive  to  remind  ourselves  that  the  amaz- 
ing things  Christianity  has  dared  to  say  concerning  the 
almighty  love  of  Grod  would  never  have  been  said  or 
credited  had  Jesus'  career  ended  at  the  grave.  Li  that 
case,  there  would  assuredly  have  been  no  talk  of  Christianity 
as  '  the  rehgion  of  joy,'  for  His  triumph  over  the  last 
enemy  radically  affects  our  view  of  God.  The  Resurrec- 
tion, that  is,  may  be  described  as  an  exhibition  of  the 
all -transforming  supremacy  of  Spirit  over  the  destrojring 
powers  of  nature,  which  reveals  Divine  love  as  not  wise 
and  holy  merely,  but  omnipotent.  If  then  the  Resurrec- 
tion happened,  it  formed  a  crisis  or  transition -point  in 
the  Hfe  of  humanity,  as  marking  the  inception  of  a  great 
new  era  in  the  potentiaHties  of  the  Divine  Hfe  in  the  soul 
of  man.  Nor  can  we  forget  that,  far  from  being  a  bare 
unethical  prodigy,  coming  Hke  a  bullet  from  a  pistol, 
the  Resurrection  is  itself  a  morally  conditioned  and  morally 


88       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

qualified  event ;  it  is  the  response  of  the  Father  to  Jesus' 
perfect  faith. 

No  hesitancy  need  be  felt  in  claiming  this  as  new,  at 
once  in  conception  and  in  fact.  It  differs  by  a  wide  remove 
from  such  nature-mjrths  as  are  incorporated  in  the  Oriental 
Mysteries  described  above — such  myths,  I  mean,  as  picture 
the  restoration  to  hfe  of  a  dismembered  Osiris  or  slain 
Adonis  or  mutilated  Attis.  Even  the  way  in  which  we 
come  to  know  of  Jesus'  triumph  is  different.  What  in 
the  Resurrection  narratives  we  have  primarily  to  do  with 
— the  first  fact  with  which  we  really  come  in  contact — is 
the  personal  experience  of  actual  men  ;  of  disciples  lately 
plunged  in  despair  by  their  Leader's  violent  and  hopeless 
fate,  then,  just  after,  filled  with  profound  and  unfading 
and  courageous  gladness,  because  of  something  that 
had  happened  to  change  the  face  of  life.  It  was  out 
of  this  state  of  mind  that  the  narratives  sprang,  it  is 
what  they  presuppose.  The  disciples'  faith  in  Jesus' 
victory  was  no  mere  behef  due  to  antecedent  convictions 
about  the  destiny  necessarily  reserved  for  a  man  Uke 
Jesus  ;  it  was  generated  by  experiences  of  a  revolutionary 
kind.  Their  confidence  may  have  good  grounds  or  bad 
— on  such  a  point  scientific  research  can  give  no  final 
judgment — but  at  least  as  a  spiritual  phenomenon  it  has 
no  parallel.  This  wonderful  new  life,  which  was  created 
by  faith  in  the  risen  Saviour,  and  without  which  the  Gospels 
would  never  have  been  written  or  charged  with  the  strange 
power  of  convincing  testimony  that  resides  in  them,  is 
in  a  class  by  itself  ;  and  when  in  stud3dng  the  Resurrection 
we  obey  the  only  right  principle  that  a  beginning  ought 
to  be  made  not  from  the  details  of  the  record  but  from 
the  Hving  belief  out  of  which  the  record  came,  we  reaHse 
the  virtual  impossibility  of  placing  the  narrative  as  a 
who'e  on  a  par  with  ethnic  legend.  History  can  show 
nothing  similar  to  this  emergence  of  an  original  and  un- 
conquerable spiritual  life — the  Christian  society,  in  short 
— from  the  behef,  held  by  a  few  score  men  and  women, 


in.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  89 

that  God  had  omnipotently  vindicated  His  dear  Son, 
and  that  the  renewed  and  glorified  presence  of  Jesus 
among  them  had  unsealed  a  fount  of  infinite  moral  power. 
Between  this  and  the  grotesque  myths  associated  with 
Adonis  or  Osiris,  representing  as  they  do  the  vernal  gladness 
of  the  awakened  earth,  there  could  be  no  causal  relation- 
ship at  all.  No  one  now  believes  in  Osiris  ;  but  the  picture 
of  Jesus,  dying  and  overcoming  death  in  the  strength 
of  holy  love,  is  daily  evoking  in  unnumbered  hearts  a  new 
faith  in  God,  a  new  certainty  of  pardon,  a  new  freedom 
to  stop  sinning  and  to  serve  mankind.  This  upheaval 
of  the  moral  depths,  this  liberation  within  human  life 
of  boundless  forces  of  redemption,  stands  altogether 
alone.  Whatever  in  Christianity  may  be  borrowed,  this 
specific  experience  of  an  ethical  salvation  mediated  through 
the  crucified  and  risen  Son  of  the  Father,  is  distinctive 
and  unshared. 

Two  brief  observations  may  be  added.  First  of  all,  it  is 
clear  that  Christianity  stands  and  falls  with  the  message 
of  free  Divine  grace.  It  rises  above  other  faiths  decisively 
in  virtue  of  its  Gospel  that  no  merit  can  earn  or  buy  the 
love  of  God,  because  He  loves  freely  and  gives  Himself 
to  faith  without  money  and  without  price.  Salvation  as 
God's  work  is  grace  and  nothing  else  ;  and  in  this  context 
grace  is  to  be  understood  not  as  a  nature-force,  vague, 
indefinable,  or  even  possibly  physical,  which  may  operate 
upon  a  man  irrespectively  of  any  reaction  upon  it  of  his 
mind  or  conscience  ;  it  is  simply  the  Divine  loving-kindness, 
which,  as  distilled  through  Jesus,  daily  touches  and  saves 
us.  Elsewhere,  unquestionably,  there  have  been  clear  ap- 
proaches to  this.  '  Nothing,'  Mr.  Montefiore  has  written, 
'  can  be  proved  by  more  abundant  and  overwhelming 
evidence  than  that  the  conception  of  God  as  forgiving 
from  free  grace  was  a  fundamental  and  famihar  feature 
of  the  Pharisaic   reUgion,  just  as  it  still  remains  so.'  ^ 

'  Synoptic  Gospels,  vol.  i.  p.  79.  But  this  is  to  be  corrected  by  hia 
later  statement :    '  The  Kingdom  itself,  as  we  have  seen,  is  not  so  muob 


90       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

Although,  however,  Pharisaism  may  ascribe  salvation 
wholly  to  the  forgiving  love  of  God,  it  frequently  also 
strikes  an  incongruously  legaUst  note,  thus  neutralising 
the  higher  message.  After  all,  the  Gospel's  greatness 
and  newness  is  to  be  measured  by  what  is  not  in  it,  as 
well  as  by  what  is.  Pharisaism,  besides,  can  put  forward 
nothing  comparable  to  Jesus  and  His  passion  as  a  guarantee 
of  the  Father's  mind  toward  men,  and  of  the  lengths 
His  love  will  go  to  reach  and  win  the  sinful. 

Again,  the  teaching  of  the  Shinshu  sect  in  Japanese 
Buddhism  concerning  Amida  and  his  Saving  Vow  embodies 
with  touching  impressiveness  the  thought  that  God's 
mercy  has  no  Hmit,  and  that  salvation  depends  on  some- 
thing more  than  a  man's  individual  exertions.  This  is 
in  strong  contrast  to  the  usual  Buddhist  teaching  on  the 
painful  acquisition  of  merit,  whereby  the  soul  is  led  through 
toil  and  hardship  to  ultimate  deUverance  or  extinction. 
Of  the  Amida  faith  Mr.  Arthur  Lloyd  has  said  :  '  It  re- 
cognises man  as  a  sinner,  it  preaches  the  Gospel  to  the 
poor,  and  it  has  a  salvation  by  faith  in  a  Saviour  who 
has  done  everything  for  the  soul.'  ^  Significantly,  however, 
Mr.  Lloyd  and  other  scholars  regard  it  as  not  in  the  least 
improbable  that  the  Amida  creed  may  itself  be  Christian 
in  origin.  Further,  as  some  beheve,  the  salvation  offered 
in  Amida  is  rather  from  suffering  than  from  sin.  That 
would  of  course  be  in  agreement  with  the  normal  Buddhist 
tradition.  And  once  more,  it  cannot  be  forgotten  that 
Amida  in  the  last  resort  is  a  subjective  creation  of  the 
mind,    with   no   place  in  history,   and  in  reahty  as  far 

a  work  as  a  grace.  Do  what  he  will,  man  never  deserves  it ;  do  his  duty 
as  much  as  he  may,  man  has  no  claim  for  special  recognition  and 
reward.  The  Kingdom,  when  it  comes,  will  be  f£ir  greater  and  more 
glorious  than  man  can  have  merited.  It  is  not  the  product  of  calculating 
justice  and  retribution  ;  it  is  the  outflow  of  God's  free  and  exuberant 
love.  I  do  not  think,'  he  continues,  '  that  these  few  statements  go  beyond 
what  Jesus  actually  says  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  I  am  also  inclined 
to  think  that,  though  they  are  not  without  parallels  in  the  Rabbinic 
literature,  they  nevertheless  may  correctly  be  regarded  as  comparatively 
new  and  original '  {The  Religious  Teaching  of  Jesus,  pp.  97-8). 
*  Reports  of  World  Missionary  Conference  (1910),  vol.  iv.  p.  99. 


m.]  THE  DIVINE  SAVING  ACTIVITY  91 

removed  from  concrete  fact  as  the  polytheist  aeons  of 
Gnosticism. 

In  the  religion  of  India,  it  is  well  known,  free  Divine 
grace  has  aU  along  been  obscured  and  virtually  obliterated 
by  the  haunting  conceptions  of  Karma  and  transmigration. 
This  profoundly  serious  but  mechanically  inexorable 
system  of  retribution,  prolonging  itself  as  it  were  auto- 
matically and  by  the  sad  nature  of  things  from  life  to  Ufe, 
can  only,  it  is  held,  be  reversed  or  escaped  from  by  the 
gaining  of  merit  or  of  that  higher  knowledge  which  alone 
releases  men  from  Samsara,  the  cycle  or  wheel  of  unreal 
illusion.  In  short,  no  faith  except  the  Christianity  of  the 
New  Testament  has  dared  to  repudiate  merit  as,  from 
the  supreme  reUgious  point  of  view,  a  pure  delusion  ;  no 
other  has  made  this  utter  breach  with  the  thought  of 
supererogatory  works  and  meritorious  performances  as 
either  a  guiding  condition  of  or  a  restraining  influence 
on  God's  deahngs  with  the  children  of  men.  It  is  dis- 
tinctive of  the  Gospel  to  proclaim  that  in  rehgion  God 
is  the  doer,  and  we  receivers  only.  Merit,  for  a  living 
conscience,  must  beget  either  despair  or  pride  ;  yet  men 
everjnvhere  cHng  to  it,  and  nothing  but  the  sight  of  Jesus, 
in  His  character  as  the  infinite  gift  of  God,  has  availed 
to  break  its  spell. 

Secondly,  the  redemption  we  owe  to  God  in  Christ  is  des- 
tined not  for  single  Hves  merely,  but  for  the  whole  family 
of  man.  The  Christian  is  what  he  is  through  the  mutual 
giving  and  receiving  of  the  brethren.  It  is  the  remark 
of  a  psychologist  that  '  the  strictly  individual  human 
mind,  with  which  alone  the  older  introspective  and  de- 
scriptive psychology  concerned  itself,  is  an  abstraction 
merely  and  has  no  real  existence.'  *  Similarly,  the  Church 
thinker,  at  least  in  the  Protestantism  of  to-day,  greatly 
needs  to  be  recalled  to  the  fundamental  truth  that  the 
Christian  does  not  stand  as  an  indi\adual,  but  as  a  member 
of  a  society.     This  was  made  clear  in  the  original  Gospel ; 

*  McDougall,  Social  Ptychology,  p.  16. 


92       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lboT. 

for  the  Kingdom  of  God,  into  which  Jesus  introduces 
all  who  seek  Him,  is  a  new  order  or  spiritual  dispensation 
wherein  all  are  called  to  live  the  brotherly  life  as  being 
all  children  of  the  one  redeeming  Father,  indwelt  by  the 
Spirit  of  a  new  community.  In  contrast  to  paganism 
this  is  novel,  since  the  idea  of  a  moral  religion  for  humanity 
never  dawned  on  the  ancient  mind.  Its  golden  age  was 
in  the  past.  The  vast  hope  of  a  Divine  world-kingdom 
derives  in  fact  from  the  Hebrew  prophets,  whose  dreams 
were  greater  dreams  than  any  dreamt  before.  Yet  even 
here  we  cannot  open  the  New  Testament  without  becoming 
conscious  of  a  changed  atmosphere.  The  Kingdom  is 
still  a  Divine  gift ;  it  is  for  every  member  of  the  human 
family  ;  we  are  farther  off  than  ever  from  the  Greek 
self-centredness  which  required  to  leam  that  the  individual 
can  reach  the  goal  of  religious  blessedness  only  through 
the  whole  of  which  he  is  a  living  part.  But  in  the  New 
Testament,  hope  has  become  possession.  In  Jesus  and 
His  achievement  the  Klingdom,  by  what  we  may  call  a 
decisive  instalment  of  the  perfect  boon,  has  entered  on 
reahty.  It  is  in  one  vital  aspect  a  world-wide  and  inter- 
national society,  the  only  society  anywhere  whose  very 
life  it  is  to  proclaim  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  to  com- 
municate each  to  each  the  love  of  God ;  for  in  Christ  is 
neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  bond  nor  free.  Can  we  say  less 
than  that  here,  in  the  Kingdom  of  God,  bestowed  by 
Divine  initiative  and  based  on  Divine  sacrifice,  there  is 
provided  for  the  first  time  the  true  oneness  and  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  personal  and  the  social  impulses  of  man  ? 
The  life  in  self  and  the  life  beyond  self  have  at  last  found 
their  fusion  in  a  transparent  unity. 


iv.J  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENOB 


LECTURE  IV 

REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE 

In  the  last  lecture  I  sought  to  answer  the  question  in 
precisely  what  respects  Christianity  differs  from,  and 
marks  an  advance  upon,  other  rehgions  by  its  Gospel 
of  Divine  saving  action.  The  redemptive  activity  of 
God  must,  for  every  reUgion  not  purely  morahstic  in 
temper,  form  at  once  the  primary  interest  and  the  founda- 
tion-stone of  all  Uve  behef .  But  salvation  is  not  a  Divine 
work  merely  ;  it  is  a  human  experience,  and  we  now 
turn  to  the  related  question  how  far  the  Christian  ex- 
perience of  being  saved  is  an  original  and  distinctive  thing 
in  human  life. 

It  might  seem  desirable  at  this  point  to  enter  upon  a 
comparative  study  of  Christianity  and  Buddhism — the 
other  obvious  example  of  a  reUgion  of  redemption  which 
has  challenged  the  faith  of  mankind  by  a  coherent  and 
impressive  view  of  what  salvation  is.  In  fact,  however, 
Buddhism  is  an  alternative  to  Christianity,  rather  than 
a  prior  stage  of  religious  development  over  against  which 
the  Gospel  marks  an  original  advance.  It  is  not  that 
Christ  gives  perfectly  what  Gautama  gave  in  part ;  in 
great  measure  He  gives  something  wholly  different.  The 
two  religions  are  disparate,  and  salvation  is  interpreted 
by  them  in  disparate  ways.  To  Buddhism,  to  put  it 
briefly,  redemption  is  from  suffering,  from  the  necessity 
of  continuing  to  live  ;  to  Christianity,  it  is  primarily 
from  godlessness,  from  sin  and  its  consequences.  We 
may  put  the  same  thing  from  another  point  of  view  by 
gaying  that  the  non-theistic  character  of  Buddhism,  with 


94       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

its  logically  consistent  disregard  of  personal  immortality, 
places  it  in  a  qualitatively  different  category,  so  far,  from 
BibUcal  faith.  Hence  it  will  be  convenient  to  reserve  our 
estimate  of  Buddhism  for  a  concluding  lecture  on  the 
Absoluteness  of  Christianity,  which  wiU  offer  a  more 
fitting  occasion  to  ask  how  we  ought  to  estimate  the 
competing  claims  of  two  religions  based  on  so  widely 
opposed  views  of  God  and  man  and  their  relations  to 
each  other.  For  the  present,  what  we  are  concerned 
with  is  the  new  elements  characteristic  of  the  Christian 
message  in  distinction  from  the  contemporary  worships 
of  the  Greco -Roman  world. 

In  all  religions  the  master  force  is  the  soul's  hunger  for 
God.  Paganism  in  the  first  century  B.C.  felt  a  craving 
for  redemption,  in  which  this  hunger  expressed  itself 
poignantly.  A  cry  went  from  many  hearts  for  such  a 
Hberation  afike  from  self  and  from  the  destructive  powers 
of  fate  and  nature  and  demonic  tyrannies  as  no  cult  of 
the  political  or  natural  type  could  afford.  '  O  wretched 
man  that  I  am  !  Who  shall  dehver  me  from  this  body 
of  death  ?  '  is  a  voice  out  of  the  very  soul  of  the  time. 
The  worthlessness  of  life  under  prevaihng  conditions  and 
restraints,  the  bitter  contrast  that  may  obtain  between 
a  highly  developed  material  culture  and  man's  chief 
end,  came  home  with  cruel  pressure  to  many  who  had 
begun  to  learn  the  true  infinitude  of  their  own  nature. 
In  keen  revolt  from  the  limitations,  defilement,  and  poverty 
of  life,  they  turned  for  light  and  cleansing  to  new  worships 
or  to  mysteries  in  new  forms.  These  syncretistic  faiths 
reveal  a  singular  admixture  of  motives  high  and  low, 
of  soaring  thought  and  crude  superstition,  of  tender 
mysticism  and  coarse  sensuahty,  of  poetic  symbol  and 
sacrament  side  by  side  with  most  primitive  science  and 
most  fanatical  moral  impulse.  But  without  exception 
they  were  meant  to  save  men.  No  cult  had  a  chance 
of  prevailing  which  did  not  offer  redemption.  To  satisfy 
and  retain  the  soul,  it  must  give  inward  peace,  freedom 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  96 

from  the  weight  of  destiny,  reconciliation  with  supernal 
powers,  security  against  the  mischances  of  life,  the  promise 
of  a  better  world  to  come.  Oriental  worships,  Jewish 
propaganda,  the  Christian  message  itself — all  occupied 
the  same  ground  in  so  far  as  they  professed  a  power  to 
rescue  from  the  clutch  of  demons,  the  downward  drift 
of  degeneration  and  decay,  and  the  all-engulfing  maw  of 
death. 

In  the  last  lecture  I  touched  upon  the  growing  sense 
of  personahty  throughout  this  period.  Whether  as  effect 
of  this  or  as  cause,  a  new  hope  of  being  saved  through 
individual  union  with  Deity  found  its  way  into  paganism 
through  the  influx  of  Eastern  cults.  Greek  and  Roman 
gods  had  been  useful  and  friendly  helpers  in  a  man's 
external  troubles,  always  provided  that  he  punctually 
discharged  his  debt  of  ceremonial  service  ;  but  no  personal 
tie  united  worshipper  and  god.  It  was  otherwise  with 
Oriental  divinities.  They  drew  men  close  to  them  in 
ecstasy  ;  they  released  the  springs  of  inward  spiritual 
experience.  Thus  the  way  had  been  paved  for  Christ's 
appeal,  involving  His  final  revelation  of  the  intrinsic  value 
of  each  soul. 

'  Freedom  from  demons,  forgiveness  and  reconcifiation 
with  God,  gladness  and  moral  strength  and  peace  in  the 
holy  spirit — of  such  things  the  early  Christians  speak,' 
says  Mr.  Glover.^  The  first  item  we  must  never  forget ; 
freedom  from  demons  was  felt  as  an  unspeakable  boon. 
In  an  age  so  prone  as  ours  to  deify  natural  law,  we  need 
the  reminder  that  no  salvation  strictly  confined  to  man's 
interior  life  could  have  won  the  adhesion  of  that  old  world. 
Some  of  the  worst  troubles  would  then  have  been  left  un- 
touched. What  vexed  men  was  not  merely  guilt  and 
moral  slacknesJi ;  they  also  longed,  perhaps  still  more 
passionately,  to  be  redeemed  from  fate,  from  this  un- 
intelligible world,  from  devils  and  death.  Possibly  the 
salvation  they  prayed  for  was  nearly  as  much  physical 

*  Conflict  of  Religions,  p.  151. 


96       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

or  political  as  spiritual.  But  it  is  a  true  instinct  which 
contends  that  redemption  covers  life  in  the  world  as 
really  as  the  life  within.  And  the  point  is  that  Christianity 
had  a  message  for  this  outward-tumed  aspect  of  experience 
also.  A  tendency  to  over-spirituaHse  has  often  concealed 
this.  Professor  Cairns  comes  closer  to  the  truth  when 
he  describes  it  as  one  of  the  fundamental  conceptions  of 
Christianity  that  it  '  views  the  Kingdom  of  God  as  con- 
sisting not  only  in  inward  deHverance  from  the  power 
of  sin,  but  ultimate  deUverance  from  everything  that 
cripples  and  depresses  the  entire  Hfe  of  man.'  ^  Modem 
thought,  even  in  Christian  forms,  much  inclines  to  cut 
the  universe  in  two  halves,  one  physical,  the  other  spiritual ; 
and  thereafter  to  argue  that  a  mechanically  constituted 
system  of  law  rules  in  the  first  half,  but  not  the  second. 
This  is  bad  philosophy,  I  should  hold  ;  but  however  that 
may  be,  it  is  certainly  out  of  touch  with  the  characteristic 
assumptions  of  the  New  Testament.  Salvation  from 
demons  is  just  the  crucial  instance  seized  on  by  the  early 
Christian  mind  of  the  principle — which  retains  all  its 
former  meaning  although  this  or  that  particular  instance 
may  lose  its  point — that  the  one  universe  has  only  one 
Ruler,  and  that  the  believer  is  a  free  man  in  his  Father's 
world.  If  we  know  that  the  earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  He 
can  make  it  ours,  fear  of  life  is  once  for  all  undermined. 
Mr.  Glover  rightly  takes  this  '  monarchic '  teaching  of 
the  Gospel  as  the  starting-point  of  any  adequate  analysis 
of  the  new  Christian  experience.  '  To  be  rid  of  the  whole 
demon-world,  to  have  left  the  demons  behind  and  their 
*'  hatred  of  men,"  their  astrology,  their  immoraUty  and 
cruelty,  their  sacrifices,  and  the  terror  of  "  possession  " 
and  theolepsy  and  enchantment,  was  happiness  in  itself.'  * 
Missionaries  in  China  or  Central  Africa  to-day  are  con- 
fronted with  a  precisely  similar  situation.  Reports  of  the 
exorcism  of  devils  from  a  Christian  convert  may  excit© 

>  BtporU  oj  World  Mi*nonarf  Con/ertrtct  (1910),  vol.  iv.  p.  260. 
*  Ojt.  oit.,  p.  147. 


rv.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  97 

a  passing  smile,  but  be  there  devils  or  be  there  none, 
at  least  deliverance  from  the  felt  obsession  of  their  presence 
and  power  is  a  part  of  what  Christ  can  give.  It  is  a  vital 
element,  for  all  converts  from  the  lower  heathenism,  of 
what  Luther  called  *the  freedom  of  a  Christian  man.' 

Then  and  now  this  emancipation  rested  at  bottom  on 
the  assurance  received  through  Jesus  that  the  world — the 
world,  not  merely  the  soul — is  such  that  it  admits  of  living 
fellowship  between  God  and  man.  The  universe,  if  Christ 
be  credible,  is  not  a  hostile  environment,  or  a  mechanically 
closed  system  ;  it  is  the  scene  in  which  the  Kingdom  is 
taking  reaUty  to  itself  and  will  eventually  triumph,  so 
that  every  evil  or  refractory  element  within  it  is  made 
subject  to  the  Father's  power.  Jesus  sets  no  Hmit  to 
God's  omnipotence,  or  to  the  legitimate  expectations 
of  trustful  prayer  offered  by  the  victims  of  pain  or  frailty. 
In  comparing  Christianity  with  other  faiths,  this  intensely 
positive  tenet  of  redemption  from  the  world,  yet  redemp- 
tion in  the  world,  must  never  be  overlooked  ;  for  it  is  vital. 
The  Christian  Gospel  is  not  to  be  taken  as  vouching  for 
the  duaHstic  and  ultimately  self-contradictory  view  that 
the  realm  of  spiritual  life  is  free,  but  cosmic  facts  under 
rigid  law.  It  proclaims  rather  that  all  life  is  one,  and 
is  all  beneath  the  Father's  rule.  Redemption,  far  from 
being,  as  with  the  mystic,  essentially  unrelated  to  the 
course  of  outward  happenings,  whose  fatal  weight  we  have 
simply  and  sorrowfully  to  bear,  is  a  life  of  joyous  trust 
in  a  Loving  Will  whose  absolute  sovereignty  governs  all 
things  with  free,  transcendent,  unhampered  power.  In 
Hamack's  phrase,  the  question  on  which  everything 
turns  is  whether  a  God  exists  *  whose  power  to  compel 
Nature  we  can  move  by  prayer.'  ^  That  is  a  higher  and 
more  comprehensive  idea,  not  one  lower  and  narrower, 
of  Christian  redemption.  On  any  other  terms,  the 
Gospel  would  be  appreciably  poorer  than  some  rivals 
in  offered  Ught  and  power. 

*■  What  M  Chrittianity  t  p.  30. 


98       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct 

Two  problems  now  emerge  clearly.  First,  and  by  way 
of  introduction,  What  is  distinctive  in  the  C5hristian  thought 
of  the  pathway  to  redemption — the  spiritual  conditions, 
that  is  to  say,  on  which  it  is  obtainable  ?  Secondly, 
What  is  distinctive  in  the  Christian  thought  of  redemption 
as  an  experience  ? 

Taking  first  the  conditions  of  being  saved,  we  are  con- 
fronted in  the  Greco-Roman  world  with  two  great  rivals 
of  the  Christian  method,  or  perhaps  three.  The  first 
is  Legalism.  It  was  in  contrast  to  the  legalism  of  con- 
temporary Jewish  reUgion  that  Christianity  first  arrived 
at  a  true  consciousness  of  itself,  and  learned  to  formulate 
its  characteristic  convictions.  The  opposition  between 
the  two  is  radical ;  and,  significantly  enough,  it  is  into 
the  faults  of  Judaism  that  Christianity  has  always  tended 
to  lapse  in  periods  of  declension.  The  ethical  aspect 
of  the  question  it  will  be  convenient  to  postpone  to  a 
later  point  in  the  discussion,  only  noting  meanwhile  that 
the  influence  of  Jesus  replaced  statutory  submission  to 
a  legal  code  by  the  spiritual  constraint  of  love.  But  on 
the  rehgious  side,  with  which  we  are  now  concerned,  a 
crucial  difference  exists  between  the  Judaistic  conception 
of  forgiveness  as  evoked  by  merit  (much  more  rarely 
as  mediated  by  sacrifice) ,  and  the  free  grace  of  the  Father's 
absolution  uniformly  taught  by  Jesus.  In  calHng  to 
Himself  all  whom  the  Law  had  made  weary  and  heavy- 
laden,  He  proclaimed  a  new  conception  of  man's  right 
relationship  to  God. 

St.  Paul  broke  with  legalism  still  more  expficitly.  Its 
ideals  he  rejected  as  exterior,  unspiritual,  and  unworthy 
of  the  God  revealed  through  Christ.  Face  to  face  with 
the  glorified  Saviour  who  had  suffered  death,  he  reaUsed 
that  for  him  religion  must  be  remodelled  from  end  to  end  ; 
that  for  him,  and  therefore  for  all,  the  road  to  peace  with 
Grod  lay  not  in  meticulous  compliance  with  the  demands 
of  a  Law — which,  owing  to  our  sheer  inabiUty  to  keep  it 
perfectly,  is  powerless  to  make  us  right  with  God  and 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  99 

cannot  in  any  case  remove  inward  corruption — but  in 
lowly,  grateful  acceptance  of  what  God  has  done  for  the 
sinful  in  the  Cross.  Whatever  our  view  of  PauUnism 
as  a  system,  and  especially  of  the  Pauhne  interpretation 
or  interpretations  of  Christ's  death,  we  shall  probably 
be  agreed  in  holding  that  true  rehgion  is  profoundly  in- 
debted to  the  man  who  thus  brought  out  decisively  the 
inner  superiority  of  grace  to  law.  For  whether  or  not 
we  charge  it  upon  Pharisaism  generally,  the  belief  was 
widely  spread  and  influential  among  Jesus'  contemporaries 
that  a  man  by  correct  observances  can  actually  put  God 
under  an  obUgation  and  present  a  claim  to  have  merit 
recognised  and  recompensed.  The  idea  of  reward  poisoned 
the  springs  of  piety,  better  intuitions  died  in  its  presence. 

One  result  of  this  Judaistic  error  naturally  was  that 
it  became  impossible  to  distinguish  ritual  and  moraUty 
as  they  ought  to  be  distinguished.  Like  ritual,  morality 
was  felt  to  concern  itself  simply  with  positive  enactments  ; 
it  was  not  supreme  but  co-ordinate  vsdth  the  non-moral ; 
it  was  moreover  to  some  extent  regarded  as  having  been 
imposed  unconditionally  from  without,  as  by  a  Sultan, 
with  the  inevitable  consequence  that  salvation  became 
restricted  to  the  Jewish  people  and  all  who  might  adhere 
to  them.  The  temper  thus  produced  in  the  worshipper 
tended  to  oscillate  between  the  extremes  of  fear  and 
pride.  St.  Paul,  under  the  influence  of  Jesus,  swept 
away  these  legaUstic  barriers,  proclaiming  that  in  view 
of  the  Cross  righteousness  is  ours  as  a  Divine  gift.  Men 
are  pardoned  not  for  their  obedience  but  out  of  pure 
Divine  love.  The  Cross  generates  such  a  view  of  God 
that  through  it  our  minds  open  to  faith  in  the  Father. 
It  cannot  be  too  clearly  understood  that  on  the  basis  of 
legalism  the  very  notion  of  redemption  becomes  irrelevant, 
except  in  the  dreary  sense  that  man  is  bidden  or  invited 
to  redeem  himself,  and  at  the  same  time  assured  that 
failure  is  inevitable.  His  conscious  impotence  brings 
him  to  despair.    True  and   victorious  morahty  is  only 


100     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

possible  through  the  impartation  of  a  new  spirit  due  to 
an  initial  assurance  of  God's  love  deeper  and  stronger 
than  all  our  sin.  Thus  it  is  Christianity  that  rose  up  to 
destroy  once  and  for  all  the  incurable  human  tendency 
in  reUgion  to  rest  upon  external  ordinances,  and  be  slaves 
of  Grod  instead  of  children.  It  declares  that  redemption 
can  be  obtained  solely  by  way  of  the  faith  which  casts 
itself  contritely  but  confidently  upon  the  Father's  mercy, 
and  that  to  be  redeemed  thus  is  to  have  goodness  made 
an  assured  career.  This  characteristic  is  of  itself  sufficient 
to  mark  out  Christianity  as  a  new  and  universal  reUgion. 
It  is  not  of  course  in  the  same  degree  new  over  against 
the  best  intuitions  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  as  compared 
with  Judaism  it  forms  a  life-giving  innovation. 

But  legalism  flourished  in  other  fields  than  those  of 
Judaism.  The  Stoic  equally  with  the  Pharisee  reared 
his  fife  on  a  basis  of  legal  works.  The  sage  has,  he  is 
encouraged  to  have,  a  lofty  consciousness  of  personal 
merit.  His  chosen  motto  is  to  fear  neither  gods  nor  men 
but  cHmb  the  path  of  triumphant  virtue  with  a  proud 
zeal,  assured  of  his  own  abihty  to  meet  all  the  claims  of 
duty,  however  exacting.  No  one,  writes  Cicero,  has 
ever  put  down  his  virtues  to  the  gods'  account,  or  given 
thanks  to  heaven  for  his  courage.^  In  such  an  atmosphere 
St.  Paul's  words  would  have  been  felt  as  exasperatingly 
unintelligible :  '  When  I  am  weak,  then  I  am  strong.' 
Here  may  well  be  found  the  source  of  that  curious  im- 
perturbable hauteur  with  which  the  Stoic  looked  down 
on  the  common  herd  tyrannised  over  by  passion — that 
boundless  self-esteem  in  which  the  hero  of  virtue  declined 
to  make  himself  the  servant  of  the  brethren  or  even  let 
his  heart  be  wrung  by  sympathy  for  their  pain.  Again, 
Divine  forgiveness  for  the  past  is  outside  his  view.  Sin, 
and  the  treatment  of  sin,  for  the  Stoic,  move  always 
within  a  man's  own  mind  ;  it  is  wisdom  doubtless  to 
recognise  our  faults,   with   their  loss  and   shortcoming, 

»  De.  Nat.  Deor.,  iii.  38. 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  101 

and  to  promise  ourselves  real  amendment  for  the  future ; 
but  our  one  substantial  hope  is  to  do  better  by  eradicating 
passion,  suppressing  emotion,  bracing  the  will,  not  in  the 
least  by  grasping  the  higher  aid  of  another,  whose  sympathy, 
even  were  it  real,  is  inaccessible.  The  remission  of  sins 
is  but  a  phrase,  since  each  violated  right  is  duly  penaHsed 
by  self-acting  law  ;  and  there  the  story  ends.  Numerous 
attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  or  at  least  assimilate 
Stoic  sage  and  Christian  saint ;  in  reaUty,  as  Boissier 
remarks,  no  more  absolute  contrast  could  be  imagined.^ 
Whereas  the  men  of  the  New  Testament  are,  at  every 
point,  dependent  on  grace,  and  therefore  free  in  the  pro- 
foundest  sense  of  freedom,  the  sage  is  self-sufficient  and 
can  be  described  by  Seneca  as  '  hving  with  the  gods  on 
equal  terms.'  In  some  ways,  indeed,  he  is  their  superior. 
'  The  wise  man,'  Seneca  says,  '  Hke  Jupiter,  despises  the 
good  things  of  earth,  but  with  this  difference  that  Jupiter 
is  unable  to  make  any  use  of  these  goods,  while  the  wise 
man  does  not  wish  to.  Like  God,  the  sage  fears  nothing ; 
but  in  God  this  absence  of  fear  is  the  effect  of  His  nature, 
while  the  sage  attains  to  it  by  voluntary  effort.'  Hence 
the  sage  must  not  be  called  God's  debtor  ;  he  is  His  ally, 
not  His  suppUant,  and  his  first  duty  is  self-confidence. 
'  What  need  have  you  of  prayers  ?  '  Seneca  asks  a  corre- 
spondent ;  '  fac  te  ipsefelicem,  provide  your  own  happiness.' 
When  at  last  death  arrives,  the  wise  man  will  be  able  to  look 
up  and  say  :  '  I  render  Thee  back  my  soul  better  than 
I  received  it.'  In  particular  moral  precepts  Stoicism 
and  Christianity  may  well  agree  ;  as  religions,  they  are 
poles  apart. 

Both  forms  of  legaUsm,  the  Judaistic  and  the  Stoic, 
Christianity  transcends  by  its  purely  reHgious  message 
of  free  Divine  grace.  Over  against  Judaism,  it  absorbs 
and  deepens  to  the  utmost  Hmit  the  evangeUc  thought 
of  the  Old  Testament,  where,  as  in  Deutero -Isaiah  and 
the  Psalms,  even  the  righteousness  of  God  appears  as  a 

*  See  La  religion  romaint,  vol.  ii.  pp.  74  fi. 


102     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

missionary  and  redemptive  attribute ;  it  further  adds 
new  dimensions  to  the  love  of  God  by  proclaiming  that, 
at  His  own  infinite  cost,  He  seeks  and  finds  the  guilty. 
Over  against  Stoicism,  it  replaces  a  quasi -theistic  but  in 
reality  semi-polytheistic  moraHsm  by  the  faithful  and 
gracious  fellowship  of  the  Hving  God.  The  supreme  gift 
offered  to  the  Stoic  by  the  new  faith  was  that  personal 
friendship  and  communion  with  the  Father  which  Jesus 
puts  within  the  reach  of  all. 

Legalism  in  the  last  resort  is  selfish.  Its  gaze  is  after 
all  directed  inwardly,  for  its  interest  lies,  predominantly 
if  not  consciously,  in  subjective  attainment,  not  in  the 
desire  to  escape  from  self  to  a  life  in  which  self  is  forgotten 
in  the  love  of  that  which  is  not  self.  And  Jesus  Christ 
first  revealed  the  true  pregnant  significance  of  the  human 
thirst  for  redemption,  by  Hberating  it  altogether  from 
the  entanglements  of  egoistic  impulse.  He  expelled  self 
from  the  focus  of  personal  concern,  by  making  God  the 
centre  of  Ufe.  There  was  in  this  no  invasion  of  personahty, 
no  encroachment  upon  ethical  self-determination ;  for 
through  the  spontaneously  recognised  and  trusted  im- 
pression of  His  own  person  He  for  the  first  time  conveyed 
to  the  human  spirit  that  abiding  sense  and  sure  appre- 
hension of  absolute  values  which  alone,  for  moral  beings, 
constitutes  the  experience  of  salvation. 

The  second  important  rival  of  the  Christian  way  of 
redemption  is  Greco-Oriental  mysticism,  which  presents 
salvation  as  a  purely  individual  experience  to  be  attained 
through  ascetic  practice  and  ecstasy.  To  this  wide  subject 
I  can  scarcely  hope  to  do  justice  in  what  must  be  a  few 
cursory  remarks.  When  the  Eastern  cults  swept  over  the 
Roman  Empire,  in  successive  waves,  the  undying  attrac- 
tion of  asceticism  for  the  human  heart  was  again  clearly 
shown.  The  fastings  and  abstinences  of  the  Mystery- 
priests,  their  scourgings  and  castrations,  filthy  garments 
and  tedious  pilgrimages,  made  a  deep  impression  on  the 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  103 

crowd.  Nor  did  the  votaries  yield  to  them  in  zeal.  Thrice 
in  winter,  writes  Juvenal,  the  worshipper  of  the  Magna 
Mater  must  bathe  in  the  icy  Tiber,  and,  shivering  with 
cold,  drag  herself  round  the  temple  on  bleeding  knees  ; 
at  the  behest  of  the  goddess  the  votary  of  Isis  must  travel 
to  Egypt  and  from  the  Nile  fetch  holy  water,  to  be  poured 
out  in  the  temple.^  Here,  as  in  Orphism,  salvation  means 
deUverance  from  the  body,  the  soul's  dungeon  ;  only  so 
is  it  possible  for  the  spark  of  true  Divinity  to  receive  the 
higher  essence  which,  if  reaHstically  assimilated,  makes 
it  immortal  and  superior  to  decay.  In  these  ascetic  ways — 
and  asceticism  is  nothing  but  legaUsm  appUed  to  the  Ufe 
of  feeUng — man  is  '  deified ' ;  instead  of  mortal  he  becomes 
god.  Along  with  this  went  a  very  influential  beUef  that 
redemption,  at  bottom,  is  a  cosmic  process.  It  is  part 
of  the  agelong  conflict  with  dark  astral  powers.  During 
its  journey  from  heaven,  the  soul  had  taken  on  the  quahties 
of  the  heavenly  spheres,  finally  entering  the  body  ;  it 
must  now  retrace  its  steps,  lay  aside  its  earthly  garb, 
and  in  pure  aetherial  form  seek  once  again  the  regions  of 
Hght.  Of  this  reascent  the  Mystery  -  experience  is  a 
symbolic  but  also  effective  anticipation.  Posidonius  is 
a  famous  name  in  such  theosophy.  It  rests,  as  we  have 
seen,  on  the  conviction  that  matter,  as  impure,  is  aUen 
to  spirit ;  the  redeemed  man,  accordingly,  is  the  man 
whose  fortunate  soul  has  been  cleansed  from  corporeal 
pollutions  and  released  from  the  incubus  of  a  mortal  frame. 
Not  every  soul  is  capable  of  the  ascent.  But  the  chosen 
heroes  of  virtue,  great  benefactors  of  mankind,  statesmen 
of  unselfish  zeal  and  wisdom — these  and  such  as  these 
attain  the  blessed  spheres. 

Asceticism  is  one  form  of  redemption  through  self- 
Buppression  ;  another  is  ecstasy,  with  its  transient  oblitera- 
tion of  rational  and  moral  consciousness.  In  the  Dionysic 
cult,  for  example,  there  supervenes  a  psychical  state  of 
wild  enthusiasm  in   which   the  patient   'loses  himself 

»  Sat.  VI.,  521-9. 


104     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

utterly  ;  in  transport  or  mania  he  passes  sheerly  under 
the  dominion  of  a  higher  external  agency,  becoming 
no  more  than  a  passive  instrument  played  upon  by  the 
god.  Members  of  the  brotherhoods  gathered  about  the 
Mysteries — those  of  Isis-Osiris,  for  example — had  im- 
parted to  them  a  promise  of  escape  from  the  dismal  load 
of  fate  and  impurity  ;  an  escape  by  way  of  a  Divine  ecstasy 
through  self -identification  (of  the  most  reaHstic  character) 
with  god  or  goddess  in  certain  dramatic  adventures  by 
means  of  which  the  deity  had  attained  triumph  over 
death,  and  thus  gained  power  to  impart  a  like  triumph 
to  the  worshipper.  The  congregation  was  appealed  to  by 
successive  scenes  forming  a  sort  of  passion-play,  and  cal- 
culated to  excite  wild  emotions  ;  or  they  shared  in  sacra- 
mental meals,  in  which  holy  emblems  were  handled  and 
sacred  potions  drunk,  believing  (it  is  said)  that  thereby 
they  actually  partook  physically  in  the  experience  of  the 
dying  and  rising  god.  Nothing,  apparently,  spoke  to 
conscience  or  the  faculties  of  rational  insight.  The  im- 
pulse came  through  fear  and  hope,  through  grief  and 
exulting  joy,  through  every  stormy  emotion  roused  by 
the  bizarre  stage -representations,  or  by  the  magically 
conceived  action  of  the  sacramental  elements.  But 
whether  union  with  Deity  was  thought  of  as  '  divinisation  ' 
or  '  regeneration,'  in  either  case  the  experience  came  and 
went  without  spiritual  meaning  or  moral  content  touching 
the  mind  by  psychologically  intelligible  motive ;  this 
was  so  even  in  worships  where  the  ritual  was  quieter. 
But  we  cannot  turn  from  all  this  with  a  smile  of  pity. 
Here  too  religion  was  a  passionate  '  prayer  for  life.'  For 
a  brief  hour,  the  possessed  votary  flung  off  the  soul's 
chain,  awoke  to  new  superhuman  powers,  savoured  a 
foretaste  of  immortality.  But  not  through  the  nobler 
faculties  of  man,  and  not  with  enduring  ethical  results. 
The  godhead  here  is  after  all  aUen  to  man's  true  nature ; 
so  ineffably  distant,  indeed,  as  to  be  accessible  solely 
to  those  who  leave  all  moral  consciousness  behind.     The 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  105 

worshipper,  to  reach  his  goal,  must  plunge  in  reUgious 
frenzy,  must  rise  to  the  Divine  in  thrilling  rapture  and 
delirium  ;  he  is  most  '  god '  when  most  completely  '  out 
of  his  mind.'  Nothing  but  transport  overwhelming  and 
uncontrollable  can  bridge  the  gulf  between  God  and 
man  ;  and  this  only  for  a  fleeting  moment. 

Thus  the  pathway  to  redemption,  as  the  Mysteries 
symbolise  it,  consists  in  the  seK -identification  of  man 
with  a  higher  Divine  essence,  through  the  instrumentahty 
of  mystic  theurgic  rites,  usually  quite  out  of  relation 
to  conscience  or  rational  thought  or  social  ties.  Human 
nature  is  impregnated  with  the  Divine  by  means  of  a 
psychic  storm,  and  initiated  souls  obtain  godhke  powers 
by  eating  a  meal  in  which  the  god  is  present  physically, 
or  by  a  bath  of  blood.  As  we  have  seen,  the  reUgious 
promise  with  which  this  entire  system  of  ideas  is  laden 
must  not  be  underestimated.  It  disclosed  a  genuine 
craving  for  Divine  life.  Nor  can  we  doubt  that  the  idea 
of  salvation,  and  of  the  means  by  which  salvation  can  be 
secured,  was  imperceptibly  being  purified.  The  change 
from  grace  conceived  as  intoxication  to  grace  conceived 
as  inspiring  ecstasy  was  all  to  the  good.  Plato's  use  of 
Orphism  proved  its  capacity  of  spiritual  meaning.  And 
it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  cultivated  worshippers  may 
well  have  read  the  gross  elements  of  ritual,  up  to  a  point, 
as  but  the  material  symbols  of  a  higher  truth.  Certainly 
the  hope  of  a  blessed,  triumphant  immortahty  was  not 
ignoble,  and  the  central  idea  of  '  regeneration,'  though 
so  reahstically  presented,  did  express  a  profound  con- 
sciousness of  creaturely,  and  even  of  moral,  imperfection. 
Some  elevating  influence  on  the  worshipper  there  must 
have  been.  '  In  the  mysteries,'  Cicero  observes,  '  we 
perceive  the  real  principles  of  Hfe,  and  learn  not  only  to 
hve  happily  but  to  die  with  fairer  hope.'  ^  True  passion 
for  the  fuller  hfe,  true  faith  and  experience,  were  somehow 
mediated   through    even   the   more    barbaric   cults,    and 

>  De  Leg.,  iii.  14. 


106     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

these,  as  we  have  seen,  were  subject  to  an  unceasing 
process  of  refinement.  Peace  and  assurance  were  every- 
where sought,  not  wholly  in  vain.  Always  the  impulse  of 
self -transcendence,  or  of  self -surrender  to  an  infinite  object, 
led  men  to  feel  for  the  hem  of  God's  garment,  even  if  a 
veil  still  concealed  His  face. 

At  the  same  time  it  would  be  misleading  to  suggest  that 
by  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era  this  process  of  re- 
finement and  moralisation  was  in  any  real  sense  complete. 
Asceticism,  the  mortifjdng  and  eradication  of  living  im- 
pulse, could  yield  only  a  spurious  moraUty.  Neither 
ecstasy  nor  the  longing  to  apprehend  Deity  in  sensible 
or  substantial  forms,  the  higher  essence  being  assimilated 
in  modes  really  physical,  can  be  accepted  as  a  legitimate 
alternative  to  faith  as  Jesus  taught  it.  Bousset,  who 
speaks  with  knowledge,  declares  roundly  that  the  piety 
of  the  Mystery  cults  was  wholly  individuafistic,  eudae- 
monistic  and  egoistic,  and  that  there  was  a  constant 
tendency  to  obHterate  the  boundary-hne  between  Grod 
and  man.^  Rohde  not  less  emphatically  says  that  no 
moral  effect  whatever  was  left  on  the  worshipper. ^  This 
has  an  extreme  sound  ;  but  at  least  it  is  undeniable  that 
in  the  Mysteries  redemption  has  only  the  faintest  connec- 
tion with  ethical  motive  and  none  at  all  with  historical 
fact,  and  that  from  beginning  to  end  ritual  tyrannises 
over  conscience.  Salvation  is  in  the  main  a  nature- 
process,  in  which  spontaneous  faith  and  moral  conviction 
have  Httle  or  no  place.^ 

Judaism,  on  the  other  hand,  appears  never  to  have 

*  Kyrios  Christos,  pp.  148-56.  He  modifies  this  severe  judgment  in 
Jesus  der  Herr,  p.  85. 

2  Kleine  Schriften,  pp.  332  ff. 

'  '  For  mysticism  morality  is  essentially  purgative  :  a  process  by  which 
the  soul  is  cleansed  from  the  desires  to  which  the  world  and  the  flesh  give 
rise,  and  fitted  to  enter  the  region  that  lies  beyond  good  and  evil.  The 
moral  life  is  therefore  for  it  only  a  preparatory  stage  which  must  be  passed 
before  we  reach  the  higher  levels ;  and  once  traversed  it  is  left  behind.  AH 
ethio  is  Interimsethik,  a  means  to  an  experience  which  is  higher  than  the 
moral  and  able  to  dispense  with  it.  The  soul  thereafter  becomes  absorbed 
in  tb«  divine  and  eternal ;  and  being  lifted  out  of  the  storm  and  streas  of 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  107 

been  touched  or  tempted  by  magic  sacramentalism. 
In  the  sjniagogue  especially,  it  stood  for  worship  in 
spirit  and  in  truth.  Ecstasy  is  a  more  famihar  pheno- 
menon, and  many  Rabbis  were  credited  with  visionary 
experiences  ;  but,  as  has  been  said,  '  such  experiences 
are  never  conceived  in  the  reaHstic  fashion  current,  for 
example,  in  the  contemporary  Mystery -reHgions.  We  are 
not  confronted  in  Judaistic  thought  with  the  notion  of 
absorption  in  the  Deity.  Nor  does  there  ever,  apparently, 
occur  the  conception  of  the  deification  of  mortals  through 
mystic  communion  with  God.'  ^  Further,  Judaism  was  no 
more  in  bondage  to  ascetic  scruple  than  the  Christianity 
of  Jesus  or  St.  Paul. 

When  we  open  the  New  Testament,  we  encounter  a 
rehgion  that  clearly  Hves  and  moves  on  a  higher  level 
than  ecstasy  and  reaHsm.  To  the  Gentile  mind, '  mystery ' 
was  a  complex  of  ritual  action  held  to  be  capable,  per 
opus  operatum,  of  effecting  spiritual  changes ;  to  St. 
Paul,  '  mystery '  is  the  gracious  purpose  of  the  Father, 
previously  hidden  but  now  at  last  unveiled  in  Jesus  Christ. 
The  emotions  stirred  by  the  Grospel  are  emotions  con- 
trolled and  solemnised  by  conscience.  It  is  not  that 
Christianity  rejects  enthusiasm ;  so  far  from  that,  it 
summons  men  everywhere  to  a  hfe  that  is  life  indeed, 
thrilling  with  the  impulse  of  power  and  joy.  '  Be  not 
drunk  with  wine,  but  be  filled  with  the  Spirit ' ;  '  Rejoice 
evermore,  and  again,  I  say,  rejoice.'  In  Jesus'  own 
heart  the  fire  burned  strong  and  deep.  Prudential  religion 
was  unknown  to  One  who  felt  each  human  soul  to  be 
worth  more  than  the  whole  world.  But  His  enthusiasm 
flows  from  faith  ;  it  is  generated  by  His  unique  knowledge 
of  the  Father  and  consists  fundamentally  in  a  great  zeal 
for  God  and  righteousness.    The  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 

ciroumstanoe  leaves  these  things  to  their  own  insignificance.     They  are 
deceptions,  or  at  least  of  little  account,  and  unfitted  to  be  the  vehicles  of 
eternal  value.     The  world  of  ordinary  life  is  negated  rather  than  moralised  * 
Sorley,  Moral  Values  and  the  Idea  of  God,  p.  isi). 
*  Kennedy,  St.  Paul  and  the  Mystery -Beligions,  p.  60. 


108     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lect. 

the  Parables,  and  the  prophecies  of  Judgment  are  sufl&cient 
proof  of  this.  And  when  we  turn  to  the  beUefs  concern- 
ing redemption  which  the  influence  of  Jesus  engendered 
in  the  minds  of  His  followers,  and  their  universal  practice 
of  refei:ring  redemption  to  the  Cross  as  its  ground  and 
medium,  we  cannot  avoid  an  acutely  marked  feeUng  of 
transition  and  of  difference  in  tone  and  accent  between 
the  picture  of  redemption  through  the  sacrifice  of  a  Divine 
victim  in  the  Mysteries,  and  the  representation  of  the 
Grospels.  What  appeals  in  the  one  case  is  reaUstic  drama, 
in  the  other  the  Cross  as  a  moral  experience.  As  it  has 
been  put,  '  in  the  mysteries  part  of  the  sombre  attraction, 
part  of  the  emotional  shock,  part  of  the  guarantee  of 
spiritual  benefit,  would  seem  to  he  in  the  crude  horror 
of  the  myths  on  which  they  were  founded.  The  would-be 
initiate  pondered  in  meditation,  saw  in  dramatic  spectacle, 
or  faintly  repeated  in  physical  wounds  the  tearing  of 
Osiris  hmb  from  hmb,  the  hacking  of  Dionysos  to  pieces, 
the  mutilation  of  Attis.  But  there  is  no  pandering  to  the 
blood-lust  in  Mark's  story,  no  emphasis  of  the  horror 
of  it  all.  It  is  throughout  the  moral  tragedy,  the  spiritual 
pathos  which  he  forces  upon  the  reader.  Here  he  found 
and  sought  to  display  the  power  that  should  transform 
the  moral  practice  of  mankind.'  ^ 

I  can  only  allude  briefly  to  a  third  conception  of  the 
way  to  redemption  which  prevailed  in  pre-Christian 
times,  viz.  IntellectuaHsm.  It  so  much  pervaded,  and 
was  so  much  pervaded  by,  the  ideas  and  motives  of 
Legahsm,  Asceticism,  and  Mysticism,  as  to  be  in  many 
aspects  indistinguishable  from  these.  IntellectuaHsm 
means  the  doctrine  that  salvation  depends  on  gnosis, 
or  esoteric  spiritual  knowledge.  Speculative  or  theo- 
logical insight  is  made  the  chief  factor  of  rehgious 
Hfe.  Important  elements  in  this  view  go  back  to  Plato, 
and    it    must    always    be    remembered    that    in    Greece 

»  H.  G.  Wood,  in  ParHng  of  the  Boads,  p.  166. 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  109 

philosophy  includes  most  of  what  we  should  now  call 
religion.  In  Neoplatonism,  and  above  all  Gnosticism, 
this  tendency  to  explain  redemption  by  the  possession  of 
esoteric  truth  came  to  a  head  ;  for  in  these  movements 
the  saved  man  is  the  man  who  has  been  instructed  in 
difficult  efficacious  doctrines  about  cosmology  and  the 
mysteries  of  the  unseen  ;  all  this  in  an  atmosphere  so 
rarefied  that  nothing  can  five  there  but  pure  knowledge. 
This  beUef  in  the  sheer  reHgious  efficacy  of  thought,  of 
logical  or  metaphysical  insight,  of  revelations  given  not 
to  babes  but  to  the  wise  and  prudent,  is  as  characteristic 
of  India  as  of  Greece.  And  in  both,  naturally,  it  is  ac- 
companied by  a  defective  view  of  sin.  If  knowledge  be 
the  secret  of  redemption,  sin,  in  so  far  as  we  need  to 
be  redeemed  from  it,  is  only  defective  insight.  Only  let 
darkened  reason  be  flooded  with  hght,  and  all  is  well.  I 
do  not  know  that  this  position  has  ever  been  over- 
thrown by  dint  of  speculative  reasoning,  but  probably  all 
who  are  not  strangers  to  genuine  religious  experience 
of  the  best  moral  type  will  agree  that  advocates  of  In- 
tellectuaUsm  have  something  to  learn  from  the  apostle's 
passionate  avowal :  '  The  good  that  I  will,  that  I  do  not, 
and  the  evil  that  I  will  not,  that  I  do.'  Wherever  ontology 
takes  precedence  of  ethics — not  necessarily  in  order  of 
thought,  but  in  felt  spiritual  importance — as  in  every 
type  of  Gnosticism,  the  temper  of  rehgion  unavoidably 
becomes  more  or  less  aristocratic,  and  theism  fades,  or 
tends  to  fade,  into  befief  in  a  rational  Ideal.  Meanwhile 
the  devout  life  sinks,  as  often  as  not,  in  a  habit  of 
pessimistic  contemplation.  No  doubt  Intellectualism  can 
claim  the  merit  of  partial  inwardness,  and,  in  comparison 
with  mystic  ecstasy,  may  even  be  called  spiritual ;  but 
its  neglect  of  the  kind  of  truth  with  which  alone  religion 
in  its  highest  form  is  concerned — truth  apprehensible 
exclusively  by  those  who  seek  to  do  God's  will — must 
always  undermine  its  pretensions  fatally.  In  our  ex- 
amination of  Christian  faith  we  shall  find  that  while  the 


no     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

believing  apprehension  of  Grod  arises  as  an  intelligent 
response  to  revelation,  and  conviction  is  a  Uving  part 
of  true  worship,  yet  the  revelation  has  come  forth  in  a 
moral  PersonaUty,  not  in  the  sham  mysteries  of  Gnosticism, 
and  is  grasped  by  simple  trust,  not  by  the  trained  faculty 
of  dialectic. 

The  Christian  Gospel,  it  has  been  shown,  is  distinctive 
among  the  religions  of  the  world  because  it  opens  up  a 
pathway  to  redemption  which  is  ethical  from  end  to  end. 
What  it  proclaims  is  not  a  reUgious  moraHsm,  but  a 
thoroughly  and  explicitly  moral  rehgion.  By  this  is 
meant  a  redemption  which  is  mediated  and  conditioned 
at  every  point  by  ethical  and  psychological  motives,  a 
redemption  the  experience  of  which  educates  the  con- 
science to  which  it  makes  appeal  and  whose  free  and 
spontaneous  assent  it  has  gained,  a  redemption  which  so 
far  from  invading  or  crushing  personality  brings  to  it 
the  fullest  life.  We  have  now  to  observe  that  in  order 
to  exhibit  this  completely  moral  character  a  Grospel  of 
redemption  is  called  upon  to  discharge  two  tasks  :  first, 
it  must  deal  adequately  with  Sin  and  evoke  true  penitence  ; 
secondly,  it  must  proffer  the  supreme  reUgious  good, 
Union  with  God,  and  proffer  it  in  such  a  form  as  will 
evoke  free  and  conscious  faith.  In  its  power  to  do  these 
things  Christianity  marks  a  new  departure.  The  experi- 
ence of  the  redeemed  man  is,  over  against  non-Christian 
life,  an  original  and  creative  thing. 

In  antiquity  there  existed  a  real  consciousness  of  moral 
evil,  even  amongst  those  who  tended  to  explain  it,  and 
partly  to  explain  it  away,  as  only  one  aspect  of  the  general 
suffering  of  the  world.  Stoicism  took  the  step  of  demand- 
ing a  radical  change  of  heart.  '  If  thou  wilt  be  good,' 
Epictetus  counsels,  '  first  believe  that  thou  art  bad.'  This 
was  a  noteworthy  advance.  Aristotle  had  had  nothing 
to  say  about  repentance,  and  the  earlier  Stoics  themselves 
stood  too  much  on  their  dignity  to  have  taste  or  leisure 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  111 

for  contrition.  Anything,  indeed,  that  the  pagan  world 
imew  about  repentance,  it  had  learnt  from  the  Jews.^ 
Sin,  in  the  Bible,  is  not  so  much  a  want  of  conformity 
to  the  law  of  Grod  as  a  defection  from  Himself  ;  it  is 
a  definite  personal  attitude  and  character.  Hence, 
whereas  to  the  Greek  mind  penitence  covers  isolated 
acts  of  shame  or  folly,  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
it  is  observable  that  saints  repent  not  merely  for  their 
acts  but  more,  and  more  poignantly,  for  themselves. 
In  particular,  the  Christian  emphasis  on  guilt,  though  it 
deepened  to  the  utmost  a  feeHng  not  previously  altogether 
absent,  gained  a  new  solemnity  and  power  from  the  new 
fact  of  the  passion  of  Christ,  in  which  are  revealed  at  once 
the  last  depths  of  moral  evil  and  the  unsearchable  love 
of  Grod.  God  seen  in  the  Cross  evokes  a  penitence  more 
profound,  more  cleansing,  more  fertile  in  moral  impulse 
and  inspiration  than  any  that  could  have  been  generated 
by  lesser  disclosures  of  the  Father,  against  whom  all  sin 
is  done.  For  the  quahty  of  penitence  is  fixed  by  its 
inward  motive,  and  of  all  motives  to  penitence  the  greatest 
is  the  Cross.  As  a  simple  fact  in  the  history  of  religious 
morahty,  this  is  undeniable.  Man's  sense  of  unworthiness 
has  been  steadily  intensified  throughout  the  centuries 
by  the  ever-increasing  influence  of  Jesus,  and  though 
at  the  present  day  repentance  often  takes  social  rather 
than  purely  personal  forms,  it  is  probably  true  to  say 
that  never  in  the  history  of  the  world  were  great  bodies 
of  men  so  conscious  of  their  corporate  moral  failure  as  they 
now  are.  But,  to  recur  to  personal  penitence,  we  owe 
to  Christ  and  His  passion  a  new  awareness  of  the  exceeding 

*  •  It  is  in  thinking  of  God  in  connection  with  evil  that  it  is  most  difficult 
for  men  to  see  life  steadily  and  see  it  whole.  The  Greek,  who  at  one 
period  came  nearest  to  this  achievement,  just  missed  the  visicm  of  Love 
as  the  Supreme  Power,  and  therefore  missed  the  consequent  sense  of 
personal  obligation  to  the  Divine  will,  which  alone  can  justify  for  the 
rational  mind  the  idea  of  sin.  The  early  Hebrew,  with  the  more  limited 
notion  of  a  tribal  God  of  uncertain  justice,  still  conceived  of  God  as  show- 
ing  a  personal  devotion  to  His  nation,  and  acknowledged  a  consequent 
obligation  the  breach  of  which  was  sin  '  {Concerning  Prayer,  p.  139). 


112     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

sinfubiess  of  sin.  He  who  has  reacted  penitently  on 
suffering  Divine  love,  on  the  sin -bearing  mind  present 
in  Jesus,  is  done  for  ever  with  the  Greek  prejudice  that 
what  men  most  require  to  be  saved  from  is  decay  and 
death,  as  weU  as  with  Rabbinic  behefs  that  repentance, 
as  a  species  of  good  works,  ranks  as  a  make-weight  in 
setting  man  right  with  Grod. 

The  Grospel,  however,  creates  penitence  not  in  vacuo 
but  by  exhibiting  God  in  a  certain  character,  and 
by  offering  His  fellowship  in  that  character  to  Faith, 
freely  and  in  perpetuity.  Christianity  is  above  all  the 
rehgion  of  completely  moraUsed  Faith,  and  nothing  in 
St.  Paul  is  greater  than  the  power  with  which  he  led 
the  Church  to  a  clear  self -consciousness  on  this  subject.^ 
There  is  the  less  need  to  labour  this  point  that  by  im- 
pHcation  I  have  been  speaking  of  it  all  the  time.  The 
redeemed  man  may  be  shortly  described  as  the  man  who 
in  adoring  and  trustful  self-abandonment  responds  to  the 
impression  of  Jesus,  finding  and  taking  in  Him  the  gracious 
love  of  Grod  ;  to  this  fundamental  truth  we  have  swung 
round  over  and  over  again.  It  is  the  core  of  the  Gospel : 
everything  distinctive  of  our  religion,  everything  in  it 
that  will  never  be  surpassed,  is  there  in  nuce.  Faith 
as  a  human  attitude  to  the  Divine  did  not  of  course  begin 
to  exist  in  the  first  century,  but  this  thoroughly  ethicised 
sort  of  faith  did  then  begin.  Nowhere  else  can  it  be  said 
unconditionally  that  the  object  of  faith  is  also  its  sufficient 
cause.  The  New  Testament,  it  is  true,  represents  even 
Abraham  as  beheving  what  he  knew  of  God  with  a  faith 
that  saves,  and  argues  that  the  Christian  Gospel,  so  far 
from  subverting  the  reUgious  order  under  which  Abraham 
lived,  rather  illustrates,  extends,  and  confirms  it.     But 

^  In  his  recent  work.  The  Pauline  Idea  of  Faith,  Dr.  W.  H.  P.  Hatch 
has  shown  that  in  St.  Paul,  who  carries  on  the  original  Hebrew  tradition, 
faith  intrinsically  has  its  being  in  the  sphere  of  psychology  and  ethics, 
not  in  mystery  or  magic.  This  has  no  real  counterpart  elsewhere.  The 
religious  attitude  native  to  classical  paganism  is  at  most  one  of  reverence, 
expressed  in  stated  rites  and  ceremonies.  Also  faith,  as  the  New  Testa- 
ment exhibits  it.  rises  clear  of  Greek  intellectualism. 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  113 

the  point  to  be  observed  is  that  it  does  extend  and  deepen 
even  Old  Testament  faith  at  its  best,  and  effects  this  by 
presenting  in  Jesus  such  a  view  of  God  as  generates  and 
satisfies  the  trust  of  a  living  conscience.  To  beheve  on 
God  in  Christ  is  a  man's  first  act  of  complete  moral  Uberty. 
Here,  and  only  here,  the  object  vrhich  faith  apprehends 
contains  all  the  sufficient  grounds  of  faith  vsdthin  itself. 
Let  a  creed  be  set  forth  as  the  object  to  which  our  trust 
is  to  be  fastened,  and  at  once  personaHty  is  invaded  and 
moral  being  encroached  upon  ;  for  no  creed  can  possibly 
be  self -attesting,  as  Christ  plainly  is.  He  needs  no  certi- 
ficate from  Church  or  theological  authority,  but  evokes 
confidence  simply  by  being  all  that  He  is.  And  here 
alone,  I  repeat,  the  message  of  redemption  is  an  ethically 
transparent  thing  and  the  experience  of  receiving  it  an 
act  of  unfettered  moral  autonomy.^ 

The  closest  ethnic  analogy  to  faith  so  interpreted  is, 
probably,  the  remarkable  Hindu  idea  of  bhakti,  one  of 
the  most  significant  and  impressive  ideas  in  all  reUgion. 
Bhakti,  or  loving  devotion  to  the  Divine  essence,  has  been 
well  described  as  *  a  heartfelt  trust  and  love  towards 
the  Supreme  Being,  a  trust  which  cuts  through  the  web 
of  Karma,  and  deHvers  him  who  practises  it  from  its 
strangling  folds.'  A  powerful  emphasis  is  laid  on  the 
sincerity  and  inwardness  of  the  votary's  self-surrender 
to  an  infinite  object.  Few  will  be  disposed  to  question 
the  real  affinity  of  this  with  Christian  faith.  All  must 
concede  that  it  represents  a  genuine  attempt  to  break 
with  ceremonialism  and  to  worship  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 
Yet  difference  is  at  least  as  plain  as  Hkeness.  There 
is  only  time  to  note  the  quite  crucial  point  that,  owing 
to  Indian  neglect  of  or  indifference  to  the  historical  reahty 

^  An  important  preparation  for  Christian  faith  may  be  seen  in  the 
personal  adhesion  and  confession  with  which  men  and  women  entered 
the  synagogue  as  proselytes,  or  became  adepts  of  the  Mysteries.  But 
only  moral  confusion  wo\Jd  result  from  the  ease  with  which  the  individual 
coi^d  join  a  new  cult  without  leaving  the  old,  could  at  tho  same  time  be 
a  worshipper  of  the  Magna  Mater  and  of  Isia. 


114     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

of  the  object  of  trust,  hhakti  implies  that  the  soul  for  the 
most  part  feeds  upon  its  own  highest  thought.  UnUke  the 
Christian  who  looks  to  Jesus,  recognisably  present  in  the 
history  of  the  past  with  a  power  of  personal  influence 
that  still  persists,  the  hhakti  worshipper  is  without  such  a 
concrete  object  of  adoring  confidence  as  can  perpetually 
purify  and  elevate  the  feeling  it  has  stirred. 

Let  us  now  turn  from  the  study  of  the  pathway  to 
Redemption,  which  deserves  a  much  more  detailed  exami- 
nation than  we  have  been  able  to  afford,  to  the  central 
problem  of  Redemption  as  an  experience  ;  in  so  far,  that  is 
to  say,  as  any  spiritual  experience  can  be  viewed  in  abstrac- 
tion from  its  antecedents.  Penitence  and  faith,  indeed,  are 
to  be  regarded  much  less  as  chronologically  anterior  con- 
ditions of  the  new  Ufe  than  as  its  vital  functions.  None 
the  less,  we  may  distinguish,  even  if  we  cannot  separate, 
between  faith  itself  and  those  blessings  the  enjoyment 
of  which  it  mediates  and  secures. 

To  begin  with,  it  is  a  vital  element  in  the  greatness  of 
Christianity  that  it  places  the  supreme  religious  boon 
— Union  with  Grod — in  the  present  hfe.  Not  that  it  stands 
alone  in  this  offer  of  a  present  blessedness.  That  in  some 
degree  Plato  had  promised,  and  one  of  the  best  things  in 
the  higher  Hinduism  is  the  teaching  that  union  with 
Deity  is  not  postponed  to  a  future  state  but  may  be  reached 
here  and  now.  But  what  is  of  crucial  importance  is 
the  presentation  of  the  God  we  are  united  to  ;  and  here, 
still  to  exemplify  the  point  from  Hinduism,  there  is  a 
wide  chasm  between  the  Father  of  Jesus  Christ  who  in 
Him  is  our  Father  also,  and  the  Hindu  thought  of  what 
is  really  a  distant  and  unfeatured  Absolute.  Allowing 
for  this,  we  cannot  make  too  much  of  Jesus'  teaching 
that  in  His  own  person  the  perfected  Kingdom  of  God 
had  gained  a  foothold  in  the  world,  and  was  for  the  first 
time  within  the  grasp  of  faith.  In  spite  of  eschatology, 
His  Grospel  does  not  essentially  consist  in  any  presenta- 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  115 

tion  of  the  future ;  it  is  a  revelation  of  the  Father.  He 
brings  men  in  touch  with  God  as  real  near,  and  sure 
to  faith  in  His  pardoning  love  and  His  illimitable  power 
to  transform  life  and  abohsh  tragedy.  St.  Paul  too, 
notwithstanding  his  eschatological  outlook,  rests  finally 
in  the  certainty  of  perfect  religious  blessings  once  for  all 
mediated  now  and  here  through  Christ,  and  tending  glory 
to  the  actual  Ufe  of  the  behever.  The  fruits  of  the  Spirit 
or  of  Christ's  indwelhng — for  experimentally  the  two 
are  one  and  the  same  thing — enrich  men  now.  Similarly 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  experienced  actuaUty  of  salvation 
is  an  idea  to  which  the  discourses  are  perpetually  recurring. 
To  have  faith  in  the  Son  is  to  have  eternal  Ufe.  '  No 
one,'  says  Christ,  '  who  Uves  and  believes  in  Me  shall  ever 
die.' 

Thus  amid  the  pessimism  of  a  decadent  age  the  Gospel 
proclaimed  far  more  than  the  prospect  of  a  better  world  ; 
it  offered  present  fellowship  with  the  Father  who  is  Lord 
equally  of  Hfe  and  death.  That  was  to  mount  higher 
than  the  highest  contemporary  paganism,  higher  even 
than  Judaism  at  its  best.  '  All  rehgions  of  the  time,' 
von  Dobschiitz  has  said,  '  were  rehgions  of  hope.  Stress 
was  laid  on  the  future  ;  the  present  time  was  but  for 
preparation.  So  in  the  mystery-cults  of  Hellenism, 
whose  highest  aim  is  to  offer  guarantees  for  other-worldly 
happiness  ;  so  too  in  Judaism,  whose  legacy  has  but  the 
aim  of  furnishing  the  happy  Hfe  in  the  kingdom  of  the 
future.'  ^  The  Christian  rehgion  has  hopes  of  its  own, 
outstripping  all  the  rest,  but  first  and  foremost  it  is  a 
rehgion  of  faith.  With  a  longing  for  heaven  that  did  not 
even  yield  to  Jewish  apocalyptic  itself,  it  combined  the 
certainty  of  having  entered  already  on  the  promised 
heritage,  of  being  now  in  communion  with  the  Father. 
For  after  all  Jesus  had  been  here  ;  He  had  been  recognised 
and  understood.      Christians  knew  that  He  had  made 

*  TranaacHona  oj  the  Third  dongresa  oj  the  Histor*/  of  BeUgiorut,  vol.  iL 
p.  320. 


116     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

the  great  beginning,  inaugurated  His  reign,  and  destroyed 
in  principle  the  power  of  death  and  demons.  '  It  is  your 
Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you  the  Kingdom ' — that 
word,  never  to  be  recalled,  impUcitly  contains  the  whole. 
Hence  that  triumphant  sense  of  possession,  of  immediately 
reaUsed  Divine  Hfe,  which  animates  the  joy  of  the  New 
Testament  and  makes  it  the  most  obviously  exultant 
book  that  has  ever  been  written. 

Students  of  first -century  literature  need  not  be  told 
that  this  distinctively  Christian  gladness,  or  glad  fear- 
lessness, which  breaks  across  life  like  a  flushing  dawn, 
was  a  strange  new  thing.  Such  joy  unspeakable  and 
full  of  glory  is  not  found  in  other  faiths.  Jesus  somehow 
was  able  to  give  men  the  courage  to  beHeve  themselves 
redeemed  ;  and  this  effect  He  produced  not  merely  by 
speaking  to  them  about  the  Father,  but  by  revealing  in  His 
own  life  the  security  and  gladness  which  flow  from  trustful 
obedience  to  the  Father's  love.  And  as  Matthew  Arnold 
said,  '  it  is  the  gladness  of  Christianity  which  has  made 
its  fortune,  and  not  its  sorrow.'  ^  Alone  of  the  reUgions 
of  the  world  it  has  dared  to  say,  '  Rejoice  evermore.' 
This  is  a  fact  so  distinctive  that  some  thinkers  have  actually 
defined  the  method  of  Christianity  as  '  salvation  by  joy '  ; 
and  whether  we  accept  the  definition  or  reserve  it  as 
but  the  exaggeration  of  valuable  truth,  at  all  events 
the  joy  in  God  generated  by  the  fact  of  Christ  was  a  new 
phenomenon  in  rehgious  history,  and  one  charged  with 
boundless  significance  for  the  creation  of  Uving  and 
victorious  morahty.  This  is  all  the  more  true  that  sorrow 
is  not  interpreted  as  necessarily  and  only  evil,  but  may 
impart  a  yet  deeper  blessedness  to  joy  itseli. 

If,  now,  we  try  to  reduce  the  Christian  experience  not 
so  much  to  its  lowest  terms  as  to  its  simplest  expression, 
we  may  describe  it,  I  think,  as  the  perfected  Divine  sonship 
of  forgiven  men.  Jesus  inaugurated  for  the  world  a  new, 
final  order  of  Sonship.    At  this  point  it  is  unnecessary 

*  Eataya  in  Criticism  (First  Series),  p.  0. 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  117 

to  raise  the  question  whether  the  personal  Sonship  of 
Jesus  is  different  from  all  others  in  '  degree '  or  '  kind.' 
These  terms  may  not  be  the  most  appropriate  or  helpful, 
'  Degree '  says  too  little,  and  *  kind '  goes  dangerously 
near  obscuring  the  fact  that  in  the  Gospel  we  are  called 
to  share  Jesus'  fiUal  Ufe.  But  in  any  case  His  Sonship 
was  unique  in  quality.  He,  the  Righteous  One,  untouched 
by  stain,  imparted  to  the  sinful  a  new  relationship  to 
God  which  in  His  own  experience  was  original  and  con- 
stitutive ;  yet  the  relationship  to  which  He  brings  men 
is  somehow  identical  with  His,  for  the  same  term,  *  Son,' 
is  employed  to  cover  His  experience  and  ours. 

Earlier  approximations  to  the  Christian  thought  of 
sonship  are  tolerably  faint,  at  least  in  paganism.  Not 
much  can  be  extracted  from  the  antique  conception  of 
gods  as  ancestors  of  tribe  or  family,  the  members  of  which 
in  consequence  enjoy  exceptional  privileges  of  dependence 
and  protection.  But  in  Egypt,  Babylon,  and  especially 
in  Israel,  a  growing  individuaUsm  produced,  or  coincided 
with,  a  sense  that  each  man  is  God's  child ;  or  to  put  it 
otherwise,  the  natural  aspect  of  the  idea  made  way  by 
degrees  for  the  voluntary  and  spiritual  aspect.  The 
Divine  sonship  of  man  is  an  idea  familiar  also  to  the  later 
Stoics,  who  broke  with  the  limits  of  nationalistic  feeUng  ; 
but  even  here  it  is  a  natural  sonship  predicable  of  man 
as  man,  an  element  provided  as  it  were  in  a  man's  con- 
genital endowment,  Uke  his  racial  ties  or  physical  mortaUty. 
As  yet  there  i«  no  perception  of  the  truth  that  sonship 
in  the  highest  sense  depends  upon,  and  consists  in,  a  moral 
and  spiritual  experience  conditioned  by  personal  choice 
and  productive  of  a  specific  sort  of  character ;  it  is  not 
in  the  least  a  mere  aspect  of  political  or  tribal  status, 
as  antiquity  all  but  universally  assumed.  Stoicism  does 
indeed  point  to  each  man's  share  in  the  World -Reason 
and  his  universal  subjection  to  the  Law  of  Nature.  But 
this,  manifestly,  is  short  of  the  truth.  What  is  still  lacking 
is  just  that  reverent  communion  with   God,  that  free 


118     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

adoring  nearness  of  the  child  to  his  Father,  which  puts 
the  New  Testament  in  a  class  by  itself.  The  individual 
has  not  yet  learned  that  precisely  as  this  one  member 
of  the  family  he  has  infinite  value  for  the  Father  of  our 
spirits  ;  he  appears  to  himself  to  count  only  as  one  unit 
in  an  imending  series  of  equally  important  or  equally 
worthless  elements  of  the  cosmic  whole.  This  in  part 
explains  the  pecuHar  ethos  of  the  Stoic  sage — so  unim- 
passioned,  so  self-conscious,  so  quietly  disdainful  of  the 
weaker  brethren,  so  curiously  unHke  a  child.  After  all, 
Jesus  stands  virtually  alone  in  His  day  for  deUght  in 
childr^. 

Sonship,  for  Christianity,  is  then  a  new  relation  of 
trust  and  freedom  toward  God  into  which  Jesus  leads 
those  who  respond  to  His  influence.  We  rightly  call  it 
perfect  sonship  because  it  is  constituted  by  spiritual 
unity  with  the  perfect  Son.  I  have  urged  more  than 
once  that  with  a  new  idea  of  Grod  everjrthing  becomes 
new,  and  of  this  a  striking  instance  is  the  freshly- 
gained  sense  of  fihal  life.  Sonship  is  no  longer  a  merely 
natural  or  ethically  indeterminate  relation,  but  one  corre- 
sponding to  the  Fatherhood  revealed  in  Christ.  It  is 
defined  as  the  sonship  illustrated  and  certified  by  Jesus' 
filial  experience  in  fife  and  death — the  sonship  to  which  He 
calls  us,  which  He  shares  with  us,  and  which  is  constituted 
by  our  participation  in  His  Spirit.  We  are  not  at  hberty 
to  fix  its  content  as  we  please,  or  to  derive  its  moral 
significance  inferentially  from  any  a  priori  philosophic 
concept  of  humanity.  It  takes  the  whole  career  of  Jesus 
to  show  what  sonship  is,  and  the  presence  in  the  New 
Testament  of  four  narratives  of  His  life  is  the  Church's 
half -conscious  homage  to  the  truth  that,  whatever  more, 
Jesus  Christ  is  our  Forerunner  and  Exemplar,  as  being 
the  Father's  true  Son,  the  perfect  BeHever  and  the  wholly 
adequate  object  of  the  Father's  love.  He  saved  men  by 
His  fihal  fife  even  before  He  saved  them  by  the  self-sacrifice 
of  death.     The  Spirit  in  Him  touched  and  changed  others 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  119 

by  contagion  ;  He  learned  the  depths  of  God's  Father- 
hood that  He  might,  in  the  power  of  His  realised  Sonship, 
persuade  others  to  seize  the  infinite  possibihty  thus  open 
to  themselves.  But  we  must  break  off  ;  no  verbal  ex- 
position of  sonship  can  equal  the  Divine  reahty  pictured 
in  the  Gospels.  As  men  come,  through  Jesus'  influence, 
to  hve  toward  God  in  an  attitude  of  unclouded  faith  and 
obedient  receptiveness,  their  thought  of  what  it  is  to  be  a 
'  son '  grows  deeper.  The  presentation  of  Faith  in  Romans 
viii.,  to  which  no  parallel  exists  in  other  rehgions,  is 
essentially  a  transcript  of  Jesus'  consciousness,  mediated 
through  Him  to  behevers. 

This  specifically  fifial  consciousness,  however,  derives 
a  distinctive  tone  or  quahty  from  the  fact  that  it  includes, 
and  is  unrecognisable  apart  from,  a  sense  of  Divine  for- 
giveness.^ The  idea  of  pardon  is  as  old  as  religion,  or  nearly ; 
but  I  beheve  it  correct  to  say  that  the  Bible  stands  alone  in 
proffering  a  pardon  which  is  not  earned,  still  less  extorted 
by  ceremonial  observance,  but  provided  freely  by  God 
at  His  own  great  cost.  In  the  Old  Testament  itself 
sacrifice  is  not  conceived  of  as  propitiating  God  in  the 
bad  heathen  sense  of  inducing  Him  to  forgo  His  wrath  ; 
it  is  rather  His  ordained  means  of  preserving  the  covenant 
relation  between  Him  and  a  sinful  people.  Similarly 
in  the  New  Testament  pardon  is  furnished  by,  not  wrung 
from,  the  free  goodwill  of  the  Father,  and  the  tragedy 
of  the  Cross  opens  a  clear  window  upon  the  eternal  Divine 
bearing  of  the  load  of  sin.  The  moral  power  of  the  Cross 
resides  in  its  being  the  Father's  sacrificial  gift.  Stoicism 
has  close  affinities  with  the  Christian  conception  of  a 
universal  moral  order,  but  there  can  be  nothing  in 
Stoicism  hke  Divine  free  pardon,  because  Deity,  like  all 
other  being,  is  subject  to  the  higher  Law  of  Fate.  By 
his  own  power  man  mounts,  and  that  hardly,  into  the 
atmosphere  of  calm.    In  the  last  sense  he  forgives  himself. 

*  Soderblom  well  remarks  that  the  word  '  love  '  may  be  drawn  down 
to  the  level  of  nature-religion,  but  '  forgivenese  '  cannot. 


120     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

Thus  in  CJhristianity  redemption  is  a  psychologically 
mediated  form  of  experience  ;  and  this  experience,  in 
its  constitutive  factors,  is  traceable  to  the  influence  of  a 
historical  Redeemer,  who  is  not  the  Leader  of  Faith  merely 
but  the  Divine  pledge  and  guarantee  of  salvation.  It 
represents  a  type  of  life  unknown  before,  whose  moral 
quaUty  transcends  all  reUgion  that  can  be  called  ascetic, 
ecstatic,  gnostic,  or  legal.  The  pure  ethical  quaUty  on 
which  I  have  laid  stress  is  of  cardinal  importance.  '  Jesus,' 
it  has  been  tersely  said, '  did  both  things  :  He  completely 
moraUsed  reUgion,  and  He  secured  religious  motives  for 
every  part  of  moraUty.'  ^ 

In  conclusion,  let  us  raise  the  question  in  what  respects 
the  redeemed  Ufe  enjoyed  in  Christianity  is  a  greater  and 
higher  thing  than  Old  Testament  faith  at  its  most  advanced 
point.  The  following  considerations  seem  worthy  of 
special  note : 

(1)  There  is  a  new  certainty  of  God.  The  assurance 
of  Grod's  almighty  love  conveyed  through  Jesus,  and 
specifically  through  His  death  and  triumph,  is  much  more 
than  the  conditional  certainty  (as  we  may  call  it)  which 
was  all  that  Hebrew  saints  attained  to.  The  opening 
verses  of  Psalm  ciii.  give  incomparable  expression  to  the 
gratitude  and  trust  of  the  devout  heart ;  but  it  is  per- 
missible to  feel  that  if  the  writer  had  had  his  family 
massacred  or  had  been  carried  off  into  exile,  his  conscious- 
ness of  Divine  favour,  and  quite  definitely  of  Divine 
forgiveness,  would  have  been  seriously  undermined.  But 
the  fact  of  Christ  has  given  men  '  boldness  and  access ' 
— the  joyful  mood  of  those  who  have  been  completely 

*  Jiilicher  in  Kultur  der  Oegenwart,  i.  iv.  p.  64.  Cf.  Carlyle  in  Hero 
Worship  (p.  98) :  *  Mark  here  the  difference  of  Paganism  and  Christianism, 
one  great  difference.  Paganism  emblemed  the  Operations  of  Nature  ; 
the  destinies,  efforts,  combinations,  vicissitudes  of  things  and  men  in  this 
world  ;  Christianism  emblemed  the  Law  of  Human  Duty,  the  Moral 
Law  of  Man.  One  was  for  the  sensuous  nature  :  a  rude  helpless  utter- 
ance of  the  first  Thought  of  men, — the  chief  recognised  virtue,  Courage, 
Superiority  to  Fear,  The  other  was  not  for  the  sensuous  nature,  but 
for  the  moral.     What  a  progress  is  here,  if  in  that  one  respect  only  !  * 


IV.]  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  121 

reconciled  to  God.  They  have  received  an  initial  and 
irrefragable  assurance  of  God's  love  which  can  be  laid 
down  once  for  all  as  the  foundation  of  Hfe.  How  far 
Christians  have  been  able  to  Uve  at  this  level  is  another 
story  ;  but  what  differentiates  the  New  Testament  from 
all  other  books  is  that  there  we  envisage  the  believed 
facts  which  released  this  triumphant  gladness  in  men's 
hearts  ;  we  also  see  some  men — St.  Paul  is  one — whose 
faith  was  truly  worthy  of  the  glorious  revelation  by 
which  he  was  confronted.  It  is  significant  that  the  New 
Testament  contains  nothing  hke  the  Book  of  Job.  Some- 
thing has  happened  to  make  men  sure  of  the  Father. 

(2)  In  consequence,  fear  of  the  world  has  vanished. 
Not  that  the  Hebrew  sense  of  human  fragiUty  *  is  gone  ; 
even  St.  Paul  can  shudder  for  a  passing  moment  at  the 
thought  of  death,  of  being,  as  he  puts  it,  '  unclothed.' 
But  that  frail  sense  of  weakness  in  presence  of  the  world 
and  its  destructive  powers  is  swallowed  up  and  lost  in  the 
exulting  conviction  that  God's  redemptive  energies  cannot 
ever  be  frustrated  by  any  tragic  fault  of  man  or  nature. 
The  resurrection  of  Jesus,  which  must  always  be  construed 
as  morally  correlative  to  His  perfect  trust  in  God,  is  a 
test  case  ;  it  has  revealed  immortality  in  being  ;  it  is  felt 
as  exhibiting  the  Divine  Love  as  omnipotently  victorious, 
in  a  crucial  instance,  over  all  hostile  forces,  death  and 
demons  equally  ;  it  is  under  the  canopy  of  this  Love  that 
the  beUever  now  Hves,  and  not  the  believer  only  but  the 
whole  world.  Christians  were  fortunate  in  having  'per- 
ceived this  love,  and  taken  in  the  wonder  of  it ;  but  once 
seen  to  be  there,  it  was  objectively  real  and  active,  blessing 
the  entire  family  of  mankind.  If  even  the  Crucifixion 
could  be  transmuted  into  a  medium  of  universal  good, 
love,  the  apostles  felt,  was  at  the  heart  of  things.  Not 
even  God  could  change  the  past  fact  of  Jesus'  death  or 
aboHsh  the  wickedness  of  those  who  caused  it ;  but  He 
could  change  its  value,  and  its  value  was  changed  radically 

*  Philo  too  dwells  on  man's  creaturely  nothingness  in  God's  presence. 


122     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

when  men  came  in  faith  to  interpret  it  as  the  subKme 
manifestation  of  Divine  Love  mediated  through  utter 
human  fideUty.  A  new  Ught  thus  fell  upon  the  omni- 
potence of  God  which  gave  mastery  over  the  world. 

(3)  The  hope  of  a  blessed  future  life  is  carried  on  to 
its  completion.  The  new  disclosure  of  God  necessarily 
reacted  upon  eschatology  ;  for  in  view  of  the  Father  a 
present  redemption  must  contain  impUcitly  the  promise 
not  of  its  perpetuation  merely  but  of  its  perfecting.  On 
this  third  point  we  may  conveniently  linger  a  moment, 
in  the  first  instance  fetching  a  circle  round  by  the  higher 
ethnic  ideas. 

It  has  been  roundly  stated  that  *  with  regard  to  the 
beUef  in  Heaven,  in  the  immortaHty  of  the  soul,  in  the 
reunion  of  the  dead,  and  in  a  future  retribution,  the  Pagan 
world  differed  from  the  Christian  in  nothing  save  in  the 
grounds  for  such  beliefs.'  ^  To  any  one  who  understands 
the  nature  of  religious  conviction  it  will  be  obvious  that 
we  really  cannot  regard  the  grounds  on  which  such  con- 
viction is  held  as  of  small  importance,  or  indeed  as  causing 
no  difference  of  ultimate  meaning  or  quahty  of  assurance 
in  the  conviction  itself.  But  it  is  the  question  of  fact 
that  primarily  concerns  us.  Aristotle  taught  nothing 
more  than  the  indestructibiUty  of  the  rational  principle 
in  man,  unfettered  by  the  chains  of  sense  ;  it  is  not  a 
real  and  personal  life  he  promises,  but  the  persistence 
of  an  abstraction.  The  earher  and  profounder  argument 
in  Plato's  Phaedo  is  ethical,  not  rehgious  in  the  full 
sense  of  that  word  ;  I  mean,  what  he  insists  upon  is  not 
the  communion  of  filial  hearts  with  the  Father,  but  the 
purifying  discipUne  of  the  soul  in  a  fife  to  come,  as  well 
as  its  kinship  with  the  unseen  and  incorruptible.  It  has 
been  rightly  said  that  Plato  lays  so  much  stress  on  the 
individual  soul  that  we  cannot  befieve  that  he  would 
have  allowed  it  to  lose  its  personaHty  in  the  Absolute  ;  * 

*  Farrer,  Paganism  and  Christianity,  p.  108. 

*  See  Moore,  Religious  Thought  oj  the  Oreekt,  p.  163. 


IT.J  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  123 

still,  even  so  the  eventual  destiny  of  the  soul  is  left 
in  doubt,  as  the  personal  being  of  God  is — ^which  is 
natural,  since  these  two  ideas  are  correlative.  In  later 
Greek  philosophy  the  case  against  immortality  is  put 
more  strongly  than  the  case  in  its  favour.  Epicureanism, 
lacking  the  wider  outlook,  could  offer  no  prospect  of  a 
blessed  future  Hfe.  The  earlier  Stoics  allowed  that  a  good 
man's  soul  might  survive  individually  till  reabsorbed  in 
the  primal  fire ;  while  in  Posidonius,  and  after,  the 
fortunes  of  the  soul  are  usually  described  in  terms  of 
a  curiously  intellectualistic  kind.^  The  '  daimon,'  or 
released  soul,  is  represented  as  spending  the  interval 
before  the  next  world -conflagration  in  '  watching  the  stars 
go  round.'  Thus  Seneca  consoles  Marcia,  who  had  lost 
her  son,  by  the  reflection  that  her  dead  father  will  be 
teaching  her  boy  the  courses  of  the  stars  in  their  neighbour- 
hood. ^  Further,  the  Christian  hope  is  intelligible  and 
definite  in  a  sense  in  which  this  could  not  be  asserted, 
for  example,  of  the  Greek  Mysteries,  which  addressed 
themselves  to  feeling.  But  even  in  the  most  refigious 
circles,  a  sad  uncertainty  concerning  the  future,  whether 
it  should  bring  good  or  ill,  was  often  expressed.  The 
reader  of  Greek  and  Latin  Hterature  may  well  feel  that 
Tibullus'  fines  utter  the  sigh  of  all  antiquity  at  the  gate 
of  death  :  '  There  are  no  fields  of  harvest  below,  ho  culti- 
vated vineyards,  but  fierce  Cerberus  and  the  Stygian 
ferry-boat.  A  pale  crowd,  with  fleshless  chaps  and  burnt 
hair,  wander  by  the  gloomy  marsh.'  ^ 

The  Christian  Grospel  of  immortafity  put  first  things 
first.  It  laid  its  finger  on  communion  with  God,  ex- 
perienced here  and  never  to  be  broken,  and  including 
as  part  of  its  own  impHcit  meaning  the  promise  of  hfe 

1  Epictetus  held  that  hope  is  limited  to  this  life  ;  of.  Bonhoffer,  Epiktet 
und  das  Neue  Testament. 

*  Bevan,  Stoics  and  Sceptics,  p.  111. 

■  '  Non  seges  est  infra,  non  vinea  culta,  sed  audax 

Cerberus  et  Stygiae  navita  ttirpis  aquae  ; 
lUic  pertussisque  genis  ustoque  capillo 

Errat  ad  obscuroa  pallida  turba  lacus.*     (l.  x.) 


124     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

everlasting.  Apart  from  this,  nothing  more  than  survival 
(which  many  faiths  have  offered)  can  be  looked  for,  not 
life  in  perfected  form.  What  Scripture  fixes  on  is  the 
centrality  of  God,  as  the  Father  who  will  not  let  His  children 
go  ;  and  the  implications  of  this  for  djdng  men.  The  one 
question  that  interests  Christianity  is  whether  men  do  or 
do  not  attain  to  the  destiny  contained  for  them  in  Christ. 
It  is  a  destiny  no  human  powers  can  achieve,  but  we  may 
have  it  as  a  Divine  gift.  And  the  future  existence  is  not, 
as  in  so  many  eschatologies,  conceived  as  a  mere  pro- 
longation of  earth.  Both  ethically  and  teleologically  it 
is  a  glorified  and  transformed  type  of  being,  from  which 
all  moral  hindrances  and  antagonisms  have  been  ehminated. 
Thus  the  Christian  hope  closely  resembles  the  Platonic 
in  its  keen  feeling  for  the  intrinsically  unsatisfying  nature 
of  the  present  world  ;  it  differs  by  refusing  to  reject  the 
finite,  which  it  holds  must  be  the  medium  and  element 
through  which  we  realise  and  enjoy  the  infinite  and 
eternal. 

In  thus  fixing  upon  communion  with  the  Father  as  the 
root  of  the  immortal  hope,  Christianity  stands  by  itself. 
It  is  distinct  from  Judaism  and  Zoroastrianism  in  this 
aspect  in  proportion  as  its  thought  of  God,  with  what- 
ever profound  similarities,  is  distinct  from  theirs.  The 
Zoroastrian  view  of  man's  relation  to  Deity  could  never, 
owing  to  its  at  least  partially  legaHstic  conception  of  faith, 
be  simple  or  direct.  '  Dwelling  in  eternal  fight  with 
Ahura  Mazda  can  scarcely  be  imagined  otherwise  than  as 
the  deferential  attendance  of  a  servant  at  the  brilfiant 
court  of  his  lord.'  *  What  the  Grospel  envisages  is  not 
merely  the  human  will  bent  in  obedience  to  a  Divine 
Sovereign,  but  the  perfect  form  of  that  commimion  of  a 
son  with  the  Father  which  is  real  now,  despite  sin  and 
sorrow,  and  embraces  the  promise  and  potency  of  com- 
plete blessedness.  Happiness  need  not  be  added  to  this  ; 
this  itself  is  happiness.     To  put  all  in  a  word,  the  Christian 

*  Steinmana,  Der  religiHae  Unsterblichkeitsglaube,'  p.  64. 


IV.)  REDEMPTION  AS  AN  EXPERIENCE  126 

hope  of  immortality  is  purely  religious.  It  rests  on  and 
revolves  round  the  self -bestowal  of  Grod  in  Jesus. 

It  is  also  this  specifically  Christian  view  of  God  which 
distinguishes  its  eschatology  from  that  of  ancient  mys- 
ticism. If  we  consider  the  ideas  of  eternal  Hfe  present 
in  the  Bacchic,  the  Orphic,  and  the  Eleusinian  Mysteries, 
in  the  Pythagorean  movement,  and  even  in  certain  strains 
of  the  Platonic  philosophy,  they  seem  but  to  presage  a 
perpetuation  of  the  higher  hfe  which  now  is  ours.  They 
speak  of  continuance,  not  perfecting.  True  Hfe  is  now 
as  complete  as  it  will  ever  be.  The  typically  mystical 
position  has  never  been  better  expressed  than  in  some 
early  words  of  Schleiermacher :  '  In  the  midst  of  the 
finite  to  be  one  with  the  Infinite,  and  in  every  moment 
to  be  eternal  —  this  is  the  immortaUty  of  reKgion.' 
Progress  there  is,  and  strictly  can  be,  none  :  the  mystic 
experience,  unrelated  as  it  is  to  past  and  future,  is  com- 
plete within  itself  ;  thus  too  it  will  be  after  death.  But 
Christian  fellowship  with  God,  which  cannot  be  divided 
into  isolated  moments  of  ecstasy,  is  a  permanent  and 
progressive  thing.  Just  because  communion  with  the 
Father  is  morally  constituted,  and  cannot  be  produced 
by  physical  or  natural  devices  or  by  any  technique  of 
soul -management,  progress  is  its  vital  condition.  It  does 
not  form,  as  with  the  mystic,  an  alternative  to  or  inter- 
ruption of  '  secular '  occupations,  but  is  the  inspiration 
and  the  aim  of  all  experience  and  all  duty.  In  mysticism 
of  the  characteristic  type,  enjoyment  of  Hfe  eternal  is  a 
timeless  rapture  out  of  relation  to  our  moral  tasks  ;  in 
Christianity  it  is  an  experience  we  cannot  acquire  or 
retain  except  in  touch  with  the  concrete  reaHties  of  duty. 
Hence  to  gain  at  last,  beyond  death,  unimpeded  fellowship 
with  God  must  mean  by  its  very  nature  the  completion 
of  ethical  personaHty. 

It  would  of  course  be  vain  to  argue  that  Christianity 
was  the  first  to  teach  a  blessed  future  life.  Hebrew  faith, 
more  especially  in  post-canonical  writers,  had  developed 


126     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lect. 

its  devout  individualism  in  a  sublime  form  of  eschatology. 
But  the  Christian  hope  was  bound  to  gain  through  the  new 
grasp  of  the  Father.  The  contents  of  hope  itself  were 
enriched,  and  certainly  not  less  the  grounds  on  which 
it  rested.  Jesus'  own  behef  in  immortaUty  is  a  fact  of 
the  very  first  magnitude  ;  He  who  knew  God  best  and 
loved  Him  as  no  other  has  done,  was  surest  of  the  life 
to  come.  As  already  noted,  His  victory  over  the  grave 
and  His  revelation  of  Himself  to  beHevers  as  the  Living 
One,  must  be  construed  as  furnishing  the  crucial  instance 
of  what  may  be  called  immortaUty  in  being.  Li  principle, 
this  broke  the  destructive  forces  of  nature  at  their  most 
formidable  point  of  incidence,  and  inaugurated  a  new 
career  for  those  whom  the  Father  has  in  His  keeping. 

Still  further— and  this  I  could  wish  to  have  put  at 
greater  length — the  Christian  hope  evidently  resumes 
and  completes  the  greatest  achievements  of  faith  by  its 
promise  of  an  eternal  Kingdom  ;  of  a  blessed  community 
no  member  of  which  can  be  blessed  in  separation  from 
others,  because  all  are  one  in  God.  This  thought  of  a 
Universal  Society,  this  illimitable  prospect,  is  lacking 
in  many  high  types  of  reUgion  ;  it  is  absent,  for  example, 
in  Buddhism,  in  Platonism,  and  indeed  in  mysticism  of 
every  kind.  The  mystic  proper  is  a  sohtary,  finding 
hfe  shared  with  men  a  thing  irrelevant  to  his  chief  aim, 
convinced  that  the  ideal  can  be  fully  reaHsed  within  the 
single  soul.  But  in  Zoroastrianism  and  pre-eminently 
in  Judaism,  while  provision  is  made  abundantly  for  the 
individual,  devout  foresight  goes  out  to  a  wide  horizon 
and  beholds  nothing  less  than  a  society  made  perfect 
in  goodness  and  gladness.  In  Christianity,  this  hope 
of  a  social  redemption  assumes  its  noblest  form,  and 
there  the  mind  of  the  New  Testament  comes  to  rest, 
as  on  an  unsurpassable  height.  It  is  the  promise  of  a 
Divine  community,  originated  here  and  made  complete 
hereafter ;  a  community  of  all  true  sons  of  God,  each 
ministering  to  all  the  Father's  love  and  gifts. 


v.]  ffiHE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIO  127 


LECTURE  V 

THE   CHRISTIAN   ETHIC 

Three  leading  issues  may  be  raised  and  made  decisive 
of  the  moral  significance  of  a  particular  religion.  These 
are,  first,  What  ethical  ideal  does  it  propose  for  man, 
not  as  an  individual  merely  but  as  member  of  a  common 
life  ?  Secondly,  What  moral  energies  for  the  achievement 
of  this  ideal  does  it  bestow  or  hberate  ?  Third,  What 
success  has  it  attained,  or  is  it  Hkely  in  the  future  to  attain, 
in  realising  the  ideal  as  conceived  by  it  ?  We  have  now 
to  ask  in  what  respects  Christianity  dififers  from  other 
faiths,  even  the  highest,  in  its  solution  of  these  problems. 
We  shall  find  that  just  because  Christianity  is  a  new 
rehgion,  it  has  a  new  moral  principle  at  its  heart. 

First,  the  Christian  moral  ideal.  There  is  a  possible, 
quite  general  point  of  view  at  which  the  Christian  ideal 
may  seem  to  be  identical  with  that  of  all  higher  thought. 
'  That  Man's  nature,'  it  has  been  said,  '  is  to  make  himself 
a  member  of  a  kingdom  whose  uniting  bonds  are  a  harmony 
of  the  true  interests  and  aims  of  its  members,  has  been 
the  burden  of  the  ethical  teaching  of  Christianity  from 
the  beginning,  and  it  has  found  clear  and  strong  expression 
in  the  utterances  of  the  greatest  thinkers  of  ancient  Greece 
and  of  the  modem  world.'  ^  Broadly  speaking,  this  is 
undeniable.  In  the  main  it  is  confirmed  by  a  fact  at 
first  sight  surprising,  namely,  that  neither  Jesus  nor 
St.  Paul  shows  any  consciousness  of  having  put  forward 
what  is,  at  least  in  substance  if  not  in  form,  a  specifically 

*  Mellone,  Studiea  in  Philosophical  Criticism,  p.  342, 


128     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

new  ideal  of  moral  life.  If  Jesus  appears  to  be  introducing 
a  novel  interpretation  of  moral  conceptions  and  moral 
tasks  when  He  says,  'A  new  commandment  I  give  unto 
you,  that  ye  love  one  another,  as  I  have  loved  you,'  * 
over  against  this  we  must  place  the  exphcit  statement 
that  love  to  God  and  to  man  exhaust  the  central  pro- 
visions of  the  Mosaic  system  of  precepts  :  '  on  these  two 
commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets.'  * 
In  the  Hght  of  His  unwavering  faith  in  the  Divine  character 
of  Old  Testament  revelation,  it  is  antecedently  improbable 
that  Jesus  should  have  seemed  to  Himself  to  be  propound- 
ing a  radically  different  ideal  from  that  of  old  time.  And 
St.  Paul,  the  next  most  revolutionary  thinker,  though 
acutely  conscious  of  the  difference  Christ  had  made  to 
religion,  gives  no  sign  of  discarding  the  ethical  ideal  of 
the  Old  Testament :  he  that  loveth  his  neighbour  as  him- 
self, he  declares,  has  fulfilled  the  law.^  Judaism  had 
but  to  carry  out  in  practice  its  finest  and  most  spiritual 
principles.  For  the  apostle,  the  new  moral  element 
in  Christianity  did  not  consist  in  previously  undreamt-of 
values,  nor  did  even  converts  from  heathenism  need 
to  unlearn  the  moral  intuitions  they  brought  with  them — 
what  St.  Paul  calls  '  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  their 
hearts.'  *  Indeed,  he  not  infrequently  describes  the 
moral  task  of  man  in  terms  which  would  have  gained 
the  enthusiastic  assent  of  every  serious -minded  Greek. 
Not  that  men  lacked  ideals,  but  that  they  came  so  far 
short  of  reahsing  them,  in  spite  of  better  knowledge— 
this,  for  St.  Paul,  was  the  misery  of  their  condition. 

Nevertheless,  the  suggestion  that  Christianity  merely 
handed  on  an  ideal  which  it  found  in  possession  when 
it  came  is  not  one  that  can  be  seriously  entertained.  In 
the  first  place,  though  '  love '  had  long  before  been  re- 
cognised as  the  supreme  duty,  '  love '  itself  could  change 
its  meaning  with  deepening  human  experience ;  and 
unless  we  are  prepared  to  say  that  the  life  and  death  of 

*  Jokn  xiii.  34.         >  Matt.  xxu.  40.        •  Gal.  v.  U.         «  Bom.  ii.  16. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  129 

Jesus  did  nothing  to  fill  it  with  new  content  and  dilate 
the  pre-existing  conception  of  what  love  is  and  will  do 
for  its  objects,  we  must  hold  that  the  central  moral  idea 
of  Christianity  is,  in  material  respects,  new.  Clearly 
the  apostoHc  writers  are  convinced  of  this.  '  To  know 
the  love  of  Christ,  which  passeth  knowledge  * ;  '  Herein 
is  love,  .  .  .  that  God  loved  us  and  sent  His  Son '  * — such 
passages,  of  which  there  are  many,  prove  that  an  in- 
tensity and  depth  and  sweep  of  meaning  had  come  to 
fill  this  great  moral  idea  which  previously  had  been  un- 
acknowledged. Like  all  human  terms,  love  gains  its 
meaning  through  history,  through  intelUgible  experience  ; 
and  so  much  of  first -rank  importance  for  morafity  had 
happened  in  the  career  of  Jesus  that  even  the  profoundest 
thoughts  regarding  Love  and  its  impKcations  which  the 
best  pre-Christian  minds  had  cherished  were  now  modified, 
heightened,  and  suffused  by  a  new  atmosphere.  The 
new  elements  are  of  course  continuous  with  the  old  ;  there 
is  no  transition  to  a  different  kind  of  life  ;  but  we  cannot 
say  that  the  moral  ideal  is  unaltered. 

Secondly,  and  this  is  less  disputable,  Jesus'  reading 
of  the  ethical  ideal  is  altogether  original  in  contrast  to 
the  behefs  of  His  own  day.*  It  was  original,  at  least,  to 
be  in  earnest  with  the  Old  Testament  ideal.  He  quite 
consciously  taught  a  morafity  distinct  from  that  inculcated 
by  Pharisaic  leaders  ;  His  was  a  moraUty  of  inwardness 
and  conscience,  and  gave  an  interpretation  other  than 
theirs  to  the  purpose  served  by  moral  law  and  to  the 
characteristic  righteousness  of  members  of  the  Kingdom. 
The  gulf  between  the  two  positions  is  at  points  starthngly 
wide.  It  was  Pharisaic  doctrine  that  ceremonial  enact- 
ments are  as  important  as  the  demands  of  mercy  and 

*  Eph.  iii.  19  ;  1  John  iv.  10. 

•  Part  of  its  originality  lies  in  the  crucial  fact  that  it  is  not  an  Interim)- 
ethik,  thereby  differing  radically  from  the  ethic  of  Jewish  Apocalyptic. 
See  on  this  topic  Preisker's  suggestive  article  in  Studien  und  Kritiken  for 
1919  (pp.  1-45).  Preisker  finds  the  root  of  Jesus'  ethic  in  His  religiouB 
individualism  ;  but  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  for  Jesus  the  end  is  th© 
Kingdom  of  God,  life  in  which  is  social  as  well  as  individual. 


130     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [uect. 

justice,  with  the  inevitable  result  that  higher  morality 
ranked  only  as  one  item  in  the  hst  of  obligations  incumbent 
on  men.  Ethics,  in  short,  were  poisoned  by  legaUsm.* 
Law  gave  the  tone,  and  law  is  chiefly  concerned  with  the 
forbidden ;  as  a  famiHar  Jewish  maxim  puts  it,  *  that 
which  thou  wilt  not  have  men  do  to  thee,  do  not  thou  to 
them.'  In  such  a  field,  casuistry  flourished  luxuriantly. 
Further,  the  wide  sphere  of  action  which  Ues  completely 
outside  of  law  was  abandoned  to  the  arbitrary  choices 
of  the  individual,  a  state  of  matters  which  was  bound 
to  produce  a  purely  utilitarian  code  of  ethics  for  daily 
hfe,  and  one  wholly  unconnected  with  religion.  Again, 
if  moraUty  once  be  tied  up  with  national  law,  men  run 
a  grave  danger  of  beheving  that  they  owe  the  best  moral 
conduct  exclusively  to  members  of  their  own  nation, 
with  the  consequence  that  moral  life  is  rendered  narrow 
and  ungenerous.  To  make  things  worse,  people  were 
challenged  to  be  imitators  of  God  ;  but  then  God,  some 
teachers  said,  hated  the  wicked.  The  words  of  the  Son 
of  Sirach  prove  how  unequivocally  the  lesson  was  taught. 
'  Give  to  the  godly,'  he  exhorts,  '  and  receive  not  sinners  ; 
do  good  to  the  humble,  but  bestow  nothing  on  the  godless.' 
In  the  Parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan,  Jesus  took  oppor- 
tunity to  stamp  this  sectarian  arrogance  with  indignant 
censure. 

As  St.  Paul  complains,  Judaism  is  the  covenant  of  the 
letter,  and  the  letter  kills.  Part  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  is  devoted  to  an  exposure  of  the  ultimate  im- 
moraUty  of  clinging  fiercely  to  the  text  of  precepts,  and 
one  injurious  result  of  all  HteraUsm  is  that  conduct  which 
has  in  any  degree  risen  above  compliance  with  the  statute, 
promptly  claims  to  be  supererogatory  and  for  that  reason 
meritorious.  These  defects  appear  not  merely  in  the 
practice  of  Pharisees  but  in  their  ideal,  and  they  are  sure 

*  Jesus  gave  no  code,  thoxigh  He  gave  many  convincing  illustrations. 
It  is  misleading  to  say  that  in  the  Gospels,  contrary  to  the  usual  assump- 
tion, we  have  only  cases  not  principles  ;  what  we  really  have  is  cases  in 
which  principles  bam  and  shine. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  131 

to  induce  that  conscious  or  unconscious  sophistry  and 
hypocrisy  which  infect  every  system  that  pretends  to 
cover  all  moral  life  by  legislation.  This  is  not  to  say  that 
Pharisaism  lacked  nobler  elements.  We  judge  them 
unfairly,  or  at  least  on  unfairly  imperfect  data,  if  we  judge 
them  solely  by  the  Gospels.  In  this  party,  as  in  all  others, 
men  were  to  be  found  who  Uved  on  a  higher  level  than 
their  official  creed.  They  too  were  convinced  that  we 
ought  to  love  our  neighbour  as  ourselves,  that  the  mind 
must  be  set  on  goodness,  that  inward  disposition  counts 
for  most,  that  no  good  act  is  done  simply  for  reward.  But 
this  in  no  way  alters  the  fact  that  moraUty  vitally  and 
organically  united  to  legaUstic  reHgion  must  be  a  defective 
morality,  with  an  ideal  felt  increasingly  to  be  impure  and 
uninspiring.  Wherever  lower  elements  take  equal  rank 
with  higher,  the  whole  is  at  a  sub-Christian  level. 

Turning  to  pagan  morahty,  we  ought  first  of  all  to 
register  the  suggestive  fact  that  many  good  heathen 
regarded  the  early  Christians  as  bad,  and  that  the  educated 
world  in  particular  tended  to  scout  Christianity,  when 
first  presented  to  it,  as  an  immoral  and  barbarous  atheism. 
Christians  were  charged,  not  quite  unnaturally,  with  de- 
fective patriotism  as  well  as  disloyalty  to  the  constituted 
order.  Some  writers  go  so  far  as  to  reproach  them  with 
hatred  of  the  human  race.  This  does  not  wholly  en- 
courage the  notion  that  the  fnoral  ideal  impHcit  in  the 
Gospel  was  instinctively  recognised  by  the  best  pagan 
minds  as  identical  with  their  own.  Still,  resemblances 
are  clear.  In  the  Republic,  Plato  arrives  at  the  profoundly 
significant  conclusion  that  '  the  good  man  never  does 
evil  to  any,'  and  that  '  it  is  better  to  suffer  than  to  do 
wrong '  ;  which  in  no  uncertain  fashion  points  forward 
to  the  still  more  exacting  ideal  of  Jesus  :  '  Love  your 
enemies,  bless  them  that  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that 
hate  you,  and  pray  for  them  that  despitefuUy  use  you 
and  persecute  you.'  *    In  Stoicism,  again,  the  inwardnesa 

1  Matt.  ▼.  4A. 


132     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

of  true  morality  is  constantly  dwelt  on,  as  in  Seneca's 
fine  sajdng  :  '  So  live  with  men  as  if  God  saw  you,  so  speak 
with  God  as  if  men  heard  you.'  ^  In  other  places  attention 
is  called  to  the  absolute  necessity  of  an  interior  reforma- 
tion, if  men  are  to  become  what  they  know  they  ought 
to  be.  Always  an  ideal  norm  is  presupposed  which  con- 
demns the  empirical  facts  of  human  Hfe.  And  though 
we  may  not  care  to  subscribe  the  sweeping  assertion  that 
'  in  regard  to  resignation,  unselfishness,  pubfic  spirit, 
a  forgiving  and  tolerant  spirit,  the  ideally  perfect  pagan 
has  nothing  to  learn  from  the  Christian  of  the  highest 
type,'  2  it  is  nevertheless  notorious  that  in  these  forms 
of  excellence,  as  well  as  in  sensitiveness  to  suffering  and 
certain  kinds  of  self-control,  real  approaches  to  the  Christian 
standard  had  been  made.  To  quote  once  more  Origen's 
question,  cited  in  my  first  lecture,  '  How  was  it  possible  for 
the  gospel  doctrine  of  peace,  which  does  not  permit  men 
to  take  vengeance  even  upon  enemies,  to  prevail  through- 
out the  world,  unless  at  the  advent  of  Jesus  a  milder 
spirit  had  been  everywhere  introduced  ?  '  '  Where  pagan 
morahty,  as  truly  in  ideal  as  in  practice,  lagged  far  behind 
the  best  ethical  teaching  of  Judaism,  which  Christianity 
took  over,  is  in  the  spheres  of  Purity  *  and  Brotherhood. 

Stoicism  is  the  noblest  ethical  system  of  antiquity,^ 
with  the  possible  exception  of  Neoplatonism.  Its  affinity 
with  the  genius  of  our  own  faith  is  demonstrated  by  the 
large  proportion  of  its  moral  doctrine  which  Christianity 
was  able  to  claim  and  adapt  to  its  own  principles.  How 
deeply  the  Christian  moral  tradition  has  been  indebted 
to  Stoic  conceptions  of  a  cosmopoHtan  society  of  man- 
kind, of  the  moral  Law  of  Nature,  of  the  limited  scope 

»  Epist  10.  *  Farrer,  op.  cit.,  p.  169.  '  adv.  Cels.  ii.  30. 

*  Epictetus  tells  us  we  must  not  be  too  hard  on  men  who  are  unchaite 
before  marriage  {Enchir.  47). 

'  Yet  Augustine,  as  Mr.  Lacey  points  out,  '  found  a  fundamental 
absvu-dity  in  Stoic  ethics,  which  bade  men  seek  beatitude  by  living  in 
accordance  with  nature,  and  at  the  same  time  advised  an  escape  from 
life  by  suicide,  if  natural  troubles  became  more  than  one  could  bear  witli 
dignity  '  {Nature,  Miracle,  and  Sin,  p.  100). 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  133 

of  human  enactments,  of  the  dignity  of  man  !  But 
the  question  we  are  now  concerned  with  is  this  :  How 
far  does  Stoicism  anticipate  the  Christian  ideal  of  loving 
all  men  as  brethren  and  as  equal  objects  of  Divine  love  ? 
In  terms  the  anticipation  might  appear  complete.  Seneca 
says  :  '  It  behoves  you  to  hve  for  another,  if  you  would 
Uve  for  yourself.'  ^  And  again  :  '  It  is  required  of  a  man 
to  be  of  benefit  to  men,  to  many  if  he  can,  failing  that  to 
a  few,  faiUng  that  to  those  nearest  him,  faiUng  that  to 
himself.'  *  '  Let  us  give,'  he  pleads,  '  as  we  should  wish 
to  receive.'  '  The  same  emphasis  on  universal  brother- 
hood and  the  duty  of  self-sacrifice  is  characteristic  of 
Epictetus  and  Marcus  AureUus,  as  when  the  latter  writes, 
'  It  is  the  differentia  of  man  to  love  even  those  who  do 
wrong '  ;  *  and  the  former  quotes  approvingly  the  story 
of  Pittacus,  one  of  the  seven  wise  men,  who  let  an  assailant 
go,  saying,  '  Forgiveness  is  better  than  revenge,  for  while 
the  former  is  the  sign  of  a  gentle  nature,  revenge  is  that  of 
a  savage  one.'  ^  These  are  but  a  few  amongst  possible 
quotations. 

And  yet  we  must  not  too  hastily  conclude  that  by 
loving  one's  neighbour  Stoicism  and  Christianity  mean 
exactly  the  same  thing.  Stoicism,  hke  Buddhism,  aimed 
not  so  much  at  love  as  at  benevolence,  or  rather  benevolent 
detachment.  And  benevolence  is  not  love ;  there  is 
no  passion  in  it.  The  moral  teaching  of  Epictetus  rests 
on  the  assumption  that  nothing  is  really  good  except 
what  is  in  our  own  power,  and  that  we  ought  to  stand 
clear  of  everything  else.  The  sage  ought  to  serve  his 
brethren,  but  he  errs  if  he  admits  them  or  their  troubles 
to  a  place  in  his  heart ;  and  pity,  Hke  other  feehngs,  is 
expressly  condemned.  In  Mr.  Be  van's  careful  words  : 
'  The  most  that  can  be  allowed  when  the  Wise  Man  goes 
to  console  a  mourner,  is  that  he  should  feign  sympathy 
as  a  means  of  attaining  his  object,  but  he  must  take  care 

*  Epitt.  48.  '  de  Otio,  30.  '  d*  BmtJ.  ii.  1. 

«  MtiU.  TiL  St.  *  Epictotua,  Fra^,  68. 


134     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

not  to  feel  it.  He  may  sigh,  says  Epictetus,  provided 
the  sigh  does  not  come  from  his  heart. '  ^  I  am  afraid 
there  is  only  too  much  to  confirm  this  verdict  in  the  scorn 
Epictetus  displays  for  women  and  children.  Nothing 
could  reveal  better  the  essentially  aristocratic  nature  of 
even  the  highest  and  purest  ethics  of  antiquity. 

Stoic  morahty  is  after  all  tainted  by  egoism  ;  certainly 
an  austere  and  lofty  egoism,  but  egoism  none  the  less.* 
As  their  first  duty,  Seneca  counsels  his  disciples  to  five 
far  from  the  crowd.  This  is  in  harmony  with  the  teaching 
of  the  school  from  the  outset,  which  sought  the  summum 
honum  in  happiness,  and  identified  happiness  not  with 
anything  transubjective  but  with  an  attitude  of  the  will. 
Self-sufficiency  and  self-culture  take  the  world  as  stage 
and  medium  of  their  own  development.  Nothing  that 
counts  for  much  can  be  said  to  the  weak,  the  tempted, 
the  moral  failures,  the  despairing  ;  be  a  man  wise  or 
perverse,  either  way  the  universe  keeps  its  fated  course, 
and  man  fulfils  his  destiny.  Anything  hke  the  idea  of 
*  the  Church  '  we  shall  seek  vainly  in  Stoic  thought.  There 
is  no  spiritual  fellowship  in  which  each  upholds  the  other. 
Nor  does  its  hterature  afford  a  parallel  to  that  vision 
which  rose  upon  the  Hebrew  soul  in  the  fifty -third  chapter 
of  Isaiah,  with  its  revealing  insight  into  suffering  borne 
for  a  purpose  wider  than  the  life  of  the  individual,  and 
ultimately  for  the  sake  of  the  unrighteous  members  of 
society.  It  is  not  accident  but  inner  logic  that  accounta 
for  the  absence  of  this  conception  of  vicarious  suffering 
as  the  deepest  fact  of  human  life  ;  for  the  Stoic  behef 
in  personal  independence  as  the  supremely  good  thing, 
and  in  virtue  as  the  supreme  object  because  it  is  the  one 
excellence  completely  determined  by  a  man's  own  wiU, 

*  Stoics  and  Sceptics^  p.  67. 

•  We  miist  avoid  even  the  suggestion  that  the  Stoic  ideal  of  self-realisa- 
tion was  simply  selfishness.  '  The  Stoic  school,'  writes  Dill,  '  has  the 
glory  of  anticipating  the  divine  dream,  yet  far  from  realised,  of  a  human 
brotherhood,  under  the  light  from  the  Croea '  (Roman  Society  from  iSTere, 
p.  328). 


7.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  186 

has  more  than  a  touch  of  narrowness  and  arrogance,  and 
fails  in  consequence  to  interpret  the  ideal  life  as  essentially 
social  in  character  because  subservient  to  the  welfare 
of  a  larger  whole. ^  '  He  that  keepeth  his  life  shall  lose 
it '  is  a  truth  as  yet  undiscovered. 

It  is  historically  accurate,  I  beHeve,  to  say  that  the 
ethic  of  Jesus  first  raised  the  moral  ideal  quite  clear  of 
egoism. 2  In  Him  the  spirit  of  moraUty  came  to  complete 
self -consciousness,  and  spoke  with  perfect  inwardness 
and  perfect  confidence  of  that  which  ought  to  be.  The 
Kantian  doctrine  of  the  Categorical  Imperative  of  Duty, 
in  which  clear  philosophical  expression  was  for  the  first 
time  given  to  one  fundamental  principle  of  ethics,  could 
have  arisen  only  within  Christendom.  But  Jesus  is 
greater  than  Kant,  inasmuch  as  Love  is  greater  than 
Duty  and  includes  it.  It  is  good  to  treat  people  kindly 
because  we  feel  that  we  ought  to,  but  not  by  any  means 
so  good  as  to  treat  them  kindly  because  we  love  them  ; 
and  the  saint  is  simply  one  whose  power  of  loving  other 
people  is  exceptionally  large.  When  we  try  to  do  certain 
things  because  we  think  it  our  duty,  we  fail.  In  short, 
the  Kantian  imperative  of  right  for  right's  sake  will  be 
superseded  in  the  perfect  society,  when  love  is  all  in  all, 
but  the  principle  of  Jesus  will  remain.  Kant's  ethic  falls 
short  of  finality  for  the  sufficient  reason  that  it  is  ethical 
and  nothing  more. 

Again,  Jesus  is  higher  than  all  teachers  of  morality 
who  place  human  interest  at  the  centre,  not  God.^ 
Life  must  become  theocentric  before  prudential  morality 
is    finally   expeUed    and    men    are    made    conscious   of 

*  Cf .  Caird,  Evolution  of  Theology  in  the  Oreele  Philosophers,  vol.  i.  pp.  46-7. 
■  Mr.  Montefiore  writes  from  a  Jewish  standpoint :  *  "  If  any  man  would 

cotne  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself."  Who  can  measure  the  effect  of 
these  striking  words  T  Self-denial  was  not  unknown  before  Jesus  spoke. 
Yet  this  clear  envmciation  of  the  principle,  this  vivid  conception  of  the 
ideal,  were  surely  new  and  original  contributions  to  the  history  of  religion 
and  morality  '  (The  Religious  Teaching  of  Jesus,  pp.  106  f.).  On  the 
question  whether  the  Gospel  is  egoistic  because  Jesus  spoke  of  rewards 
and  punishments,  see  Weinel  in  Jesus  or  Christ  f  pp.  35-9. 

*  The  Aristotelian  ethio  is  a  fair  example. 


136     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTUN  MESSAGE   [lict. 

entering  into  a  larger  experience,  into  a  potentially 
infinite  society  possessed  of  and  enjoying  the  supreme 
good,  which  is  guaranteed  by  God  alike  in  its  goodness 
and  its  permanence.  Apart  from  this,  morality  will  of 
necessity  keep  a  certain  strain  of  self-centred  poverty 
of  nature,  an  egoism  which  even  religion  is  compelled 
to  feed.  The  emotional  cults  of  India,  for  example, 
make  shipwreck  here  ;  according  to  them,  man  is  redeemed 
from  the  world  not  in  order  that  he  may  serve  the  world, 
but  that  he  may  shake  off,  once  and  for  all,  its  Umitations 
and  troubles.  No  great  cosmic  purpose  summons  man 
to  be  a  fellow-labourer  with  God.  '  The  "  supreme  peace," 
the  "  everlasting  region,"  to  which  Krishna  brings  his 
worshippers  is  no  Kingdom  of  Grod,  no  realm  of  the  service 
of  love  in  righteousness,  but  a  seK-regarding  state  of 
personal  purification  and  endowment.'  ^ 

If  then  we  take  the  loving  promotion  of  universal  human 
brotherhood  as  the  moral  ideal  proposed  by  Jesus  and 
disseminated  ever  since  by  His  influence,  we  are  justified 
in  holding  that  this  ideal,  new  in  intensity  of  meaning 
if  not  verbally,  has  been  more  effectively  and  consistently 
promoted  by  Christianity  than  by  any  other  world -rehgion. 
Love  is  the  organising  idea  of  New  Testament  morality. 
The  Christian  ethic  is  primarily  an  ethic  of  brotherly  love, 
and  St.  Paul  rightly  sees  in  it  the  signature  of  Christ's 
own  life. 2  The  Gospel  entered  a  world  perishing  for 
lack  of  love,^  and  in  the  name  of  religion  declared  that 
no  faith  except  that  which  works  through  love  is  true 
faith.  But  love  is  never  regarded  merely  as  an  affective 
sentiment.  On  the  contrary,  did  time  permit,  it  would 
not  be  difficult  to  prove  that  it  includes,  heightens,  and 
beautifies  the  cardinal  virtues  :  the  four  kinds  of  ex- 
cellence, that  is,  chiefly  recognised  by  the  common  moral 

*  Macnicol,  Indian  Theism,  p.  260. 

*  His  disinterestedness  and  self-abnegation  (Rom.  xv.  2  ff.) ;  His  gentle- 
ness and  consideration  ( 2  Cor.  x.  1 ) ;  His  love  and  lowliness  of  mind  (Phil 
ii.  5  a. ). 

'  Even  Plato  had  failed  *  in  proportion  as  justice  itself  falls  short  of  Loto' 
(Temple,  Plato  and  Christianity,  p.  39). 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  137 

consciousness  of  Greece,  wisdom  and  justice,  courage  and 
self-control.  It  is  august  and  commanding  as  well  as 
tender.  In  particular  it  is  a  holy  love,  which  in  that 
character  can  be  rigorously  stem,  insisting  that  the  offend- 
ing hand  shall  be  cut  off  and  the  offending  eye  plucked 
out,  and  actually  declaring  that  certain  acts  are  so  antago- 
nistic to  God's  interest  in  others  that  it  were  better  to  die 
than  commit  them.  No  account  of  the  ethical  spirit  found 
in  the  New  Testament  is  true  which  does  not  recognise 
the  tremendous  moral  indignation  and  scorn  that  were 
in  Jesus.  The  sins  which  He  most  hated  were  cruelty, 
falsehood,  and  pride,  and  on  occasion  He  scourged  them 
with  scathing  words. 

If  we  look  round  for  a  crucial  instance  of  what  love 
means  for  Christianity,  no  more  searching  test  can  be 
imagined  than  the  forgiveness  of  injuries.  The  New 
Testament  lays  it  down  explicitly  that  forgiveness  of  our 
neighbour  is  a  condition  of  receiving  the  forgiveness  of 
God.  This  is  a  clear  advance  beyond  the  Old  Testament. 
There,  as  it  has  been  put,  '  the  penitent  could  accept 
and  enjoy  the  divine  pardon  and  yet  cherish  the  most 
bitter  feeUngs  towards  his  own  personal  enemy.'  ^  Higher 
thoughts  came  by  degrees.  First  there  grew  up  a  con- 
viction that  God  will  deal  with  us  as  we  have  dealt 
with  others ;  next  comes  a  direct  prohibition  of  revenge, 
followed  by  the  command  to  help  our  enemy  in  distress  ; 
finally,  in  Lev.  xix.  18,  it  is  expressly  enjoined,  '  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.'  This  forms  an  epoch- 
making  departure,  even  though  the  '  neighbour '  in 
question  is  quite  distinctly  an  Israehte  or  one  of  the 
'  gerim.'  On  the  other  hand,  this  loftier  strain  of  ethical 
teaching  is  all  along  accompanied  by  teaching  of  a  pre- 
cisely opposite  tenor  ;  the  requital  of  enemies  is  the  subject 
of  earnest  prayer  to  Jahweh,  and  the  ideal  saint  is  not 
seldom  represented  as  sating  his  thirst  for  vengeance. 
Hence  the  man  who  wished  to  pay  off  old  scores  could 

^  Cb»rlM,  Between  the  Testaments,  p.  134. 


138     ORIGINALITY  OP  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

appeal  to  his  sacred  books  in  support  of  his  intention. 
But  in  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  the  morally 
noblest  piece  of  Hterature  older  than  the  New  Testament 
itself,  we  have  a  stepping-stone  to  the  distinctively 
Christian  view.  We  read  there :  '  Love  one  another 
from  the  heart ;  and  if  a  man  sin  against  thee,  cast  forth 
the  poison  of  hate  and  speak  peaceably  to  him,  and  in  thy 
soul  hold  not  guile  ;  and  if  he  confess  and  repent,  forgive 
him.  ...  If  he  be  shameless  and  persist  in  his  wrong- 
doing, even  so  forgive  him  from  the  heart,  and  leave  to 
God  the  avenging.'  ^  It  is  obviously  felt  that  the  true 
aim  of  forgiveness  is  the  restoration  of  fellowship  between 
the  estranged  persons,  and  also  that  some  real  prepara- 
tion for  this  can  be  made,  even  in  a  case  of  obstinate 
wickedness,  by  the  retention  of  sympathy  and  the  sup- 
pression of  bitter  resentment.  There  is  something  very 
noble  in  this  voice  of  a  Pharisaic  mystic  pleading 
for  a  standard  of  feeling  to  which  the  legaHsts  all  about 
him  were  averse,  and  we  might  almost  say,  averse  on 
principle.  The  book  in  all  Hkelihood  was  famiUar  to  Jesus. 
Where  the  New  Testament  rises  above  even  this  late 
Judaistic  work,  and  similar  expressions  of  pagan  moralists, 
is,  I  think,  in  its  exhibition  of  loving  pardon  as  an  act 
in  which  the  human  spirit  actually  becomes  in  oi)eration 
one  with  the  Father  Himself.^  Pardon  is  no  longer  a 
Divine  injunction  merely  ;  it  is  a  grace  in  which  God 
enables  us  to  co-operate  with  His  own  attitude  to  the 
sinful,  to  do  that  which  He  does,  and  because  He  does  it. 
This  is  Jesus'  standpoint  in  announcing  what  Seeley  has 
called  His  '  most  striking  innovation  in  morahty,'  the 
Law  of  Forgiveness.  '  Love  your  enemies,'  he  said, 
'  that  ye  may  be  sons  of  your  Father.'  •    St.  Paul  repeats 

»  Gad,  vi.  3  ff. 

*  '  It  is  the  message  of  which  the  Incarnation  is  the  most  eloquent 
expression,  that  sets  free  from  moral  impotence — the  message  that  there  ia 
no  human  task  too  humble  for  its  perfect  discharge  to  be  an  act  not  of 
lonely  virtue  but  of  fellowship  with  God  Himself  '  (A.  G.  Hogg,  in  Inter* 
national  Review  of  Missions  [1917],  p.  533). 

*  Matt.  T.  44-6. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIO  139 

the  thought  in  his  phrase,  'forgiving  one  another,  even 
as  Grod  in  Christ  has  forgiven  you.'  * 

Where  Christianity  took  an  original  line  was  not  in 
thus  bidding  men  imitate  God,^  but  in  the  picture  of 
Grod  set  before  men  for  imitation,  viz.  the  Father  revealed 
in  Jesus.  In  the  experience  of  the  Son,  the  Father  has 
shown  that  He  also  submits  to  the  supreme  ethical  law 
of  serving  through  sacrifice.  He  who  gives  the  command 
of  uttermost  love,  though  He  might  seem  most  qualified 
to  exert  force  and  authority,  stoops  to  suffer,  thereby 
obeying  His  own  command.  He  imparts  forgivenees  at 
a  price  to  Himself  ;  He  mediates  forgiveness  through 
pain  in  which  He  shares.  It  is  through  the  felt  impression 
of  this  Divine  attitude  that  we  are  ourselves  enabled  to 
do  love's  hardest  duty — forgive  a  bitter  injury.  Thus 
the  love  that  constitutes  the  master  principle  of  moral 
life  is  identical  in  God  and  man. 

It  is  moreover  this  Spirit  of  Love,  kindled  by  Divine 
love  present  in  Jesus,  which  infuses  a  unique  richness 
of  meaning  into  the  idea  of  Brotherhood,  an  idea  involved 
in  the  very  nature  of  the  Christian  Church  and  regnant, 
in  however  imperfect  a  degree,  over  its  members  from 
the  first.  Christian  morality  is  social  from  end  to  end. 
It  involves  what  has  been  called  the  true  outwardness 
as  well  as  the  true  inwardness  of  refigion.  This  is  a  social 
morality  because  it  is  morality  generated  by  the  Spirit, 
and  the  Spirit  is  distinctively  the  Spirit  of  the  community  ; 
so  that  on  its  other  side  Christian  moral  life  is  but  the 
fact  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  of  course  misleading  to  suggest 
that  this  conception  of  the  brotherhood  of  all  rests  solely 
on  the  teachings  and  inspirations  of  Christianity,  for, 
as  already  noted,  in  a  less  developed  form  it  had  long  been 
famiHar  to   the   Stoics,  and  it  is  very  possible  that  ite 

»  Eph.  iv.  32. 

•  Nature  religions  changed  into  ethical  religions  as  it  eame  to  be  clearly 
seen  that  the  Divine  must  be  a  moral  standard  or  ideal  for  man,  so  that 
tile  highest  norm  of  eonduct  is,  in  Plato's  phrase,  6fiol(t>ffii  ry  ^ey, 
lation  to  God. 


140     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

practical  applications  within  the  Christian  field  remained 
for  some  time  less  wide  than  those  which  Stoicism  had 
contemplated.  But  the  brotherhood  instituted  by  Jesus 
in  expectation  of  the  consummated  Kingdom  must  not  be 
confused  with  the  philosophic  or  ethical  fraternities  which 
then  abounded,  or  even  with  contemporary  rehgiouc 
societies.  According  to  the  Gospel,  the  moraHty  of  the 
brotherly  Ufe  is  inspired  by  reHgion.  The  two  impulses 
are  one  ;  the  community  hves  by  love  and  mutual  help- 
fulness not  simply  in  obedience  to  moral  intuitions,  but 
because  all  are  objects  of  the  Father's  love.  Man  is 
brother  to  his  fellow  because  both  are  sons  of  Grod.  What 
is  really  in  view  is  a  dedicated  race.  Love,  which  had 
made  an  end  of  the  distinctions  of  rank  and  birth  and 
sex,^  poured  down  as  a  sunshine  in  which  moral  energies 
grew  apace.  It  was  moreover  a  love  for  all :  this  was 
understood  as  a  principle  from  the  first,  though  one  im- 
perfectly reaUsed,  and  the  Parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan  as 
well  as  the  precepts  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Moimt  prove  that 
Jesus  contemplated  an  unconditioned  love  to  man  as  such 
far  transcending  the  sectarian  and  unimaginative  mutual 
care  of  Church  members  often  displayed  in  after  times. 
The  temptation  to  repeat,  as  between  Christian  and  heathen, 
the  old  hurtful  division  of  Jew  and  Gentile,  was  at  first 
held  in  check  by  the  outward  circumstances  of  beUevers, 
which  forced  them  to  mingle  with  the  world,  and  still  more 
by  the  example  and  teaching  of  Jesus  Himself,  for  whom 
all  men  were  potentially  sons  of  God,  and  might  become 
so  in  full  reahty.  Where  this  moral  idea  of  brotherhood 
fades,  Christianity  as  a  religion  is  enfeebled. 

*  It  has  taken  us  centuries  to  perceive  the  originality  of  Jesus'  view  of 
women.  '  Unlike  the  Jewish  teachers,'  says  Mr.  AUworthy,  '  He  recog- 
nised no  distinction  in  spiritual  things  between  the  sexes.  The  person- 
ality of  women  was  to  Hira  of  the  same  value  as  that  of  men  ;  and  He 
regarded  it  as  equally  capable  of  training  and  development '  ( Women  in 
the  Apostolic  Church,  p.  2).  Those  who  hold  that  '  by  nattu-e  '  woman  is 
subordinate  to  man,  and  hence  unfit  for  citizenship,  buttressing  their 
position  by  verses  from  St.  Patil,  may  be  reminded  how  Aristotle  declared 
that  the  barbarian,  i.e.  the  non-Greek,  was  '  by  nature  '  a  slave.  The 
historical  movement  wipes  out,  one  by  one,  those  frontier  lines  drawn  by 
custom  or  prejudice. 


v,]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  141 

Those  who  maintain  that  Christianity  supplies  the 
religious  basis  essential  to  modem  society  are  entitled 
to  appeal  to  this  rule  of  loving  Brotherhood  grounded  in 
a  common  relationship  to  God  the  Father,  as  containing 
in  germ  the  principles  that  underlie  sound  social  hfe.  It 
lays  the  axe  to  the  root  of  social  ostracism  and  racial 
division.  It  proclaims  that  in  the  essentials  of  humanity 
all  men  are  equal,  with  an  equaUty  unaffected  by  differences 
of  physique,  education,  efficiency,  and  character.  Again, 
it  forms  the  foundation-stone  of  beHef  in  social  freedom. 
'  Then  are  the  children  free,'  Jesus  once  said  with  reference 
to  the  Temple  Tax  ;  ^  and  His  words  have  iUi  mi  table 
significance.  The  man  joined  to  God  in  faith  is  free  of 
merely  statutory  moraUty,  free  of  convention,  free  of  all 
social  traditions  that  depress  particular  classes  or  occupa- 
tions. And  once  more  it  inculcates  justice  between 
man  and  man,  and  the  service  of  each  by  his  neighbour 
in  proportion  to  need.  The  concrete  applications  of  these 
moral  and  rehgious  convictions  to  the  human  conditions 
of  our  time  cannot  be  outUned  here,  but  every  one  can 
see  with  what  piercing  directness  they  bear  upon  the  actual 
state  of  the  world.  Consciously  or  unconsciously  they 
are  inspiring  the  modem  social  movement.  They  are 
convictions  to  the  creative  fruitfulness  of  which  we  cannot 
set  bounds  for  the  future. ^ 

Thus  the  moral  ideal  of  the  Gospel  is  socially  not  less 
than  individually  a  reflection  and  outgrowth  of  the  Christian 
view  of  God  presented  in  Jesus,  and  fully  shares  its  dis- 
tinctive originaUty.  The  task  to  which  Christ  has  called 
men  answers,  in  each  vital  particular,  to  the  gift  He  bestows. 

Our  second  problem  is  :  What  powers  for  the  reaUsation 
of  this  ethical  ideal  were  either  created  or  set  free  by 
Christianity  as  a  rehgion  ?  It  is  perhaps  at  this  point 
that  our  faith  is  most  evidently  original.     Christianity 

»  Matt.  xvii.  26. 

«  On  the  foregoing  paragraph,  see  Farquhar,  The  Ortm  of  Hinduism^ 
pp.  193  fi. 


142     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

and  Buddhism  alike  inculcate  gentleness,  patience,  forgive- 
ness of  wrong,  and  even  loving  sacrifice  ;  but  they  differ 
radically  in  the  end  or  purpose  for  which  such  conduct 
is  enjoined,  and  therefore  in  the  moral  driving  power 
they  provide  So,  too,  at  the  birth  of  Christianity  the 
pagan  world  had  become  convinced  that  character  is  the 
one  thing  needful ;  it  failed  by  lack  of  access  to  a  source 
of  energy  that  makes  bad  men  good,  rouses  the  slumbering 
will,  and  ensures  that  the  tjrranny  of  evil  shall  be  broken 
The  faith  that  calls  Jesus  Lord  professes  to  satisfy  this  need. 

The  pecuUar  strength  of  Christianity  as  a  moral  force 
lies  supremely  in  its  rehgious  character  and  basis.  For 
it  offers  God  as  the  secret  of  full  personal  Hfe  for  man, 
thus  identifying  individual  morality  with  sanctification, 
and  social  morahty  with  the  natural  behaviour  to  each 
other  of  the  children  of  one  Father.  Morality  is  a 
rehgious  duty.  In  serving  the  brethren  in  love  we  are 
actually  worshipping  God,  their  Saviour  and  ours.  Whereas 
in  lower  religions  a  danger  constantly  exists  that  '  ritual ' 
duties  may  take  precedence  over  moral  obHgations,  should 
the  two  collide,  here  it  is  plainly  taught  that  external 
worship  possesses  only  a  relative,  but  love-inspired  service 
of  others  an  absolute,  value  in  God's  sight.  The  specifically 
Christian  ethic,  in  short,  flows  from  the  reHgious  meaning 
of  the  Gospel,  and  saving  faith,  receptive  of  Grod,  sends 
power  and  hfe  coursing  through  all  forms  of  moral  action. 
If  we  desire  a  glaring  contrast  to  this,  we  have  only  to 
recollect  how  primitive  Buddhism  lost  its  chief  moral 
dynamic  by  omitting  God. 

By  establishing  a  vital  union  of  rehgion  and  morahty 
the  new  faith  brought  to  completion  a  process  which  had 
undergone  a  long  history,  but  had  invariably  broken  down 
at  the  crucial  point.  This  was  the  process  of  making 
all  faith  moral  and  all  morahty  beheving.  Without 
this,  rehgion  and  morahty  of  necessity  corrupt  each  other. 
The  old  pagan  worships  had  failed  to  ethicise  hfe  largely 
because  in  temper  and  attitude  they  were  pohtical,  for 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  143 

worship  only  does  you  good  provided  you  seek  God  for  His 
own  sake.  Oriental  cults  were  different,  but  any  moral 
precepts  associated  with  them  were  chiefly  negative, 
and  they  unsealed  no  ever-flowing  fount  of  am' mating  and 
uplifting  power.  In  Jesus,  on  the  other  hand,  that  fusion 
of  faith  and  conduct  was  completed  which  long  before 
Moses  and  the  prophets  had  begun  upon  the  only  right 
lines,  and  morahty  now  secured  throughout  its  whole 
extent  the  motive  power  of  trust  in  God.  The  danger 
passed  of  that  conflict  between  rehgious  and  moral  duties 
which  always  haunted  ethnic  worships  ;  and  if  in  later 
Church  circles  the  behef  prevailed  that  correct  theological 
opinions  are  equal  in  importance  if  not  superior  to  trust 
in  God  and  the  effort  to  lead  a  holy  Hfe,  this  certainly  was 
no  part  of  original  Christianity.  According  to  Jesus, 
worship  of  the  Father  consists  in  righteousness  of  life 
springing  from  fihal  confidence  and  prayer,  moral  life 
itself  thus  forming  part  of  worship  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 
All  believers  are  priests,  and  their  priestly  offering  is 
love,  devotion,  service  of  others.  Pure  and  undefiled 
ritual,  St.  James  declares,  is  to  visit  the  fatherless  and 
widows  in  their  affliction,  and  to  keep  oneself  unspotted 
from  the  world.  So  that  Kant  is  perfectly  Christian 
when  he  pronounces  that  any  attempt  to  please  God 
otherwise  than  by  a  good  hfe  is  mere  superstition  ;  what 
he  failed  to  see  is  that  the  root  and  principle  of  a  good  hfe 
is  faith,  because  no  one  can  be  good  without  God.  Now 
this  view  of  rehgion  and  morahty  as  two  aspects  of  a  single 
life — the  distinction  between  them  being,  since  Jesus, 
obsolete — is  in  its  completed  form  a  Christian  novelty. 
Once  for  all,  over  against  all  sub -Christian  mysticisms, 
it  is  clearly  shown  that  the  interior  life  of  piety  is  no  isolated 
experience  shutting  man  off  from  his  fellows.  Prayer 
and  contemplation,  rather,  are  indissolubly  one  with 
active  sympathy  and  righteous  deahng,  for  all  together 
constitute  true  union  with  God.  Prayer  cannot  be  apart 
from  love,  nor  love  apart  from  prayer 


144     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lect. 

The  Christian,  therefore,  ought  to  be  the  best  man  in 
the  world,  for  trust  in  the  Father  supphes  an  unequalled 
moral  dynamic.  The  same  hoJds  good  of  the  Christian 
society.  It  has  been  said  pointedly  that  '  the  chief  reason 
why  the  noble  ideals  of  the  great  Eastern  rehgions  do 
not  ennoble  the  Hves  of  more  of  their  adherents  is  that 
they  tend  to  create  a  spirit  of  despair  in  those  who  accept 
them.'  ^  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the  vigour 
of  moral  life,  whether  in  the  individual  or  in  nations,  de- 
pends on  the  depth  and  breadth  and  purity  of  conviction 
about  the  Hving  God.  Ethical  progress,  in  the  deepest 
sense,  depends  upon  trust  in  a  power  which  will  not  suffer 
the  fruits  of  human  sacrifice  and  effort  to  be  swept  away 
by  the  annihilating  forces  of  change,  a  trust  which  will 
inspire  men  to  defy  the  tyranny  of  custom  and  assail  the 
estabHshed  order  of  things.  In  antiquity,  the  Jew  alone 
escaped  the  blight  of  pessimism  Thus  the  unprecedentedly 
close  bond  of  faith  and  morahty  is  in  the  Grospel  a  dis- 
tinctive excellence.  To  lead  an  ethical  life  men  need 
Ught  ;  but  primarily  they  need  not  so  much  higher  ideals  as 
triumphant  power  to  give  effect  to  ideals  they  in  point 
of  fact  revere  ;  the  worst  know  more  than  the  best  practise. 
It  is  because  Christianity  drew  its  stores  of  moral  energy 
from  hving  faith  that  it  became  a  world-reHgion,  and  if 
there  be  one  indubitable  lesson  taught  by  Church  history, 
it  is  that  the  ethical  effectiveness  of  our  rehgion  instantly 
dechnes  when  attention  is  diverted  from  the  central  thought 
of  the  Father  given  in  Christ. 

One  or  two  special  aspects  of  this  principle  may  be  noted. 
To  begin  with,  it  is  of  fundamental  significance  that  in 
Christianity  the  moral  law  is  distinctly  identified  with 
the  will  of  Grod.  This  message  was  gravely  necessary 
at  the  beginning  of  the  new  era,  when  traditional  morahty 
was  so  much  imperilled  by  the  break-up,  on  a  wide  scale, 
of  old  rehgious  befief .  Here  the  Gospel  carried  on  famihar 
truth.     '  Of  all  books,'  it  has  been  said,  '  the  Bible  is  th« 

*  BeporU  of  World  Miaaionary  Conference,  vol,  tv.  p.  320. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  146 

only  one  which  interprets  conscience  as  the  love  of  God.'  * 
No  people  except  Israel  had  placed  the  content  of  obliga- 
tion in  compliance  with  the  Divine  will,  or  made  duty  the 
same  thing  as  self -surrender  to  the  majesty  of  the  Lord. 
The  Grospel  echoes  and  prolongs  this  note.  I  should  not 
myself  care  to  say,  with  Hatch,  that  the  main  point  of 
difference  between  the  current  ethics  of  the  Greek  world 
and  the  ethics  of  the  earhest  forms  of  Christian  religion 
was  that  '  Christianity  rested  moraUty  on  a  divine  com- 
mand.' 2  Taken  Uterally,  this  is  meagre  and  external. 
But  it  does  bring  out  the  fact  that  a  change  was  made 
from  the  sanctions  of  impersonal  Reason  to  the  Father's 
will,  and  that  this  change  worked  in  a  healthy  and  desirable 
way.  MoraUty  unquestionably  comes  home  to  ordinary 
people  with  a  new  force  when  it  is  felt  to  be  grounded  in 
the  Divine  will.  The  well-known  objection  has  been  made 
to  this,  that  it  conflicts  with  genuine  ethical  autonomy ; 
but  two  considerations,  I  think,  can  rightly  be  urged  in 
answer.  First,  it  was  notoriously  in  this  form  that  morality 
was  conceived  by  Jesus.  The  ideal  of  human  life  He 
could  not  figure  except  as  obedience  to  the  Father,  to  One 
who,  as  perfect,  wills  nothing  but  what  is  perfectly  good 
for  His  children.  But  whatever  else  may  be  said  of  Jesus, 
He  is  at  least  the  great  exemplar  of  moral  liberty,  in 
whom  goodness  rises  up  from  an  inexhaustible  fountain, 
and  external  compulsion  has  no  place.  He  was  free  in 
God  and  for  the  purposes  of  God.  The  autonomy  He 
inculcated  on  His  disciples  had  reference  not  to  an  external 
God  but  to  other  men,  whose  praise  or  blame  should  be 
a  matter  of  indifference  ;  also  it  had  reference  to  their 
own  passions,  which  must  not  be  permitted  to  check 
or  deflect  action  suggested  by  love.  If  nevertheless  it 
be  argued  that  the  true  moral  law  is  that  which  a  man 
imposes  on  himself,  and  which  he  obeys  by  his  own  power, 
we  may  in  the  second  place  reply  that  such  a  position 

*  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  Isaiah,  vol.  i.  p.  13. 

•  Hibbert  Lectures,  p.  158. 


146     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

is  intrinsically  untenable,  and  that  even  Kant  places  man 
under  the  authority  of  Reason,  which  is  more  than  his 
individual  mind,  although  his  mind  is  an  expression  of  it. 
In  other  words,  freedom  is  no  more  achieved  by  neglect 
of  a  given  moral  order  than  knowledge  is  achieved  by 
neglect  of  the  rules  of  logic  .^  Now,  Christian  differs 
from  ideahst  ethics  in  this  respect,  that  for  the  authority 
of  Reason  it  substitutes  the  authority  of  God,  which  in 
fact  is  the  best  way  of  positing  the  objectivity  of  moral 
obligation,  and  of  bringing  clearness  into  a  question  which 
on  other  terms  cannot  be  quite  freed  from  obscurity. 
The  Reason  which  commands,  and  which  at  the  same  time 
is  independent  and  educative  and  redemptive  of  our  wills, 
is  God.  Thus  conceived,  the  Divine  authority,  so  far 
from  being  an  external  heteronomous  force,  is  a  Power 
self -announced  within,  to  obey  which  is  freedom,  and  to 
which  we  pay  the  homage  of  our  being  in  spontaneous 
reverence.  To  claim  independence  of  God  would  be  to 
exclude  ourselves  from  the  conditions  under  which  alone 
the  true  moral  life  can  be  Hved. 

It  is  also  worth  noting,  though  the  point  is  one  I  cannot 
here  develop,  that  by  binding  each  self  to  God  in  direct 
relationship  Christianity  avoids  the  incurable  tendency 
of  ideahstic  ethics  to  sacrifice  the  individual  to  society. 
Onty  so  can  full  weight  be  given  to  the  principle  that 
persons  ought  to  be  treated  always  as  ends,  never  merely 
as  means.  The  Kingdom  of  God,  as  the  goal  of  all  action 
— or,  in  technical  language,  the  summum  bonum,  by 
which  is  determined  the  particular  content  of  moral  law 
— constitutes  a  social  order  in  which  the  individual  blesses 
others  in  proportion  as  he  himself  is  blessed  of  God. 

Again,  the  fundamentally  religious  character  of  Christian 
ethics  appears  in  the  fact  that  in  its  view  the  struggling 
human  will  is  upheld  and  'nspired  by  Divine  grace.  The 
power   in    which    we    fulfil    obligation    is    God's    power. 

*  This  given  moral  order  must  be  construed  and  appropriated  throngh 
our  free  ethical  perception,  if  it  is  to  constitixte  our  moral  world. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIO  147 

Paganism  knew  little  of  this.  Seneca  would  have  stared 
at  the  suggestion  that  man  needs  higher  aid  to  achieve 
goodness,  which  is  intelligible  enough,  since  he  describes 
the  path  of  goodness  as  not  difficult. 

Grace  at  work  in  hfe  to  reinforce  will  and  enhghten 
perception  may  be  conceived  of  in  different  forms,  and 
the  original  Christian  message  forces  us  to  choose  the 
form  under  which  we  shall  conceive  it.  After  all  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  grace  ;  the  one  reahty  is  a  gracious 
God,  who  persuades  and  educates,  and  who  e^^kes  an 
utter  trust  '  of  a  kind  to  succour,  and  not  annihilate,  the 
moral  personahty.'  ^  .When  we  speak  of  grace,  we  must 
never  say  it,  but  always  Him,  *  It  *  is  His  personal 
influence.  In  the  Gospels,  grace  acts  through  a  new 
sense  of  God's  Fatherhood  generated  by  the  redeeming 
impression  of  Jesus.  Those  who  meet  with  Jesus,  and 
drink  in  hfe  from  the  felt  nearness  of  God  m  Him,  thereby 
obtain  a  new  confidence  in  their  own  moral  future  ;  they 
acquire  at  once  the  courage  to  try  a  new  hfe  and  power 
to  persevere.  It  is  the  wonderful  new  certainty  of  pardon 
that  effects  the  change.  Even  after  our  eyes  have  opened 
to  the  Divine  hoHness,  we  know  that  God  forgives  us 
when,  in  Jesus'  presence,  it  comes  home  to  us  that  He 
is  seeking  communion  with  our  spirits  and  thus  summon- 
ing us  to  labour  along  with  Him  in  His  moral  enterprise. 
This  infuses  moral  courage,  it  gives  us  back  our  nerve. 
It  enables  us  to  treat  our  former  life  as  bygone  and  start 
on  fresh  fines.  The  great  assurance  that  Grod  has  caUed 
us  His  children,  to  be  organs  and  expressions  of  His  wiU, 
bestows  a  sense  of  emancipation,  of  earnestness,  of  joy. 
This  is  the  ethical  redemption,  removing  misery  and  con- 
veying power,  which  we  see  taking  place  over  and  over 
again  in  the  pages  of  the  Gospels.  Moral  renewal  is  here 
the  other  side  of  rehgious  blessing  ;  and  just  as  that 
blessing    has    no    real    counterpart    in    other    faiths,    we 

*  Oman,  Grace  and  Personality,  p.  11.  This  is  one  of  the  genuinely 
rswaxding  books  in  recent  theology,  and  like  all  such  books  it  dema&cb 
olo«e  study. 


148     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

similarly  find  nowhere  else  the  materials  of  true  and 
overcoming  morahty.  History  has  seen  nothing  Hke 
the  self-accrediting  fact  of  Christ  at  work  upon  man's 
moral  nature,  with  an  influence  which  at  once  humbles 
and  exalts  ;  by  the  infinitude  of  its  demand  reducing 
him  to  despair,  by  the  impression  of  holy  love  making 
him  a  new  being,  to  whom  morality  has  become  a  matter 
of  course,  as  the  flower  and  the  fruit  are  to  the  tree. 

By  St.  Paul  virtually  the  same  truth  is  expressed  in  terms 
of  the  indwelling  Spirit.  The  Spirit,  which  becomes  ours 
through  faith,  breaks  the  tyranny  of  the  flesh  and  by 
lifting  men  into  a  world  of  moral  Hberty  enables  them  to 
realise  a  goodness  otherwise  beyond  their  reach  or  their 
aspiration.  In  the  light  of  this  moral  transformation 
wrought  in  the  heart  by  the  Hving  and  life-giving  Spirit, 
the  anti-legahsm  of  St.  Paul  is  seen  to  be  not  merely 
not  dangerous,  but  a  forward  step  in  ethics  of  positively 
decisive  value.  Instead  of  hard-and-fast  commands, 
chiefly  negative,  and  given  from  without,  men  now  have 
within  an  inexhaustible  store  of  power.  This  is  a  morahty 
whose  resources  are  all  of  them  in  faith  :  it  is  rehgious 
from  end  to  end.  Christians  are  made  better  men  by 
a  present  experience  of  God.  The  idea  of  earning  salvation 
has  vanished  once  for  all.  Obedience,  which  it  had  been 
felt  might  flow  from  prudence  or  fear,  is  now  the  free 
outcome  of  gratitude  and  trust.  Nor  is  the  impulse 
of  the  Spirit  arbitrary  or  fanatical,  for  its  fruits  are  simply 
different  aspects  of  the  character  of  Jesus.  '  The  harvest 
of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  good  temper,  kindUnees, 
generosity,  fideUty,  gentleness,  self -control.'  ^ 

The  importance  of  the  ethical  advance  indicated  by 
St.  Paul's  anti -legalism  is  not  lessened  by  the  fact  that  in 
practice  certain  modifications  of  method  may  prove 
necessary.  His  obvious  beHef  was  that  the  Spirit  opens 
such  deep  springs  and  pours  from  them  such  a  wealth 
of  love  for  man  that  morahty  ceases  to  be  a  law  because 

>  Qml.  ▼.  22  (Mofiatt). 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  14« 

it  is  the  very  breath  of  hfe.  Hence  he  gave  converts 
few  regulations,  preferring  to  cast  them  on  the  Spirit 
for  guidance.  This  is  the  main  principle  of  Christian 
morahty,  and  will  always  be  so.  But  in  actual  life,  Uke 
other  missionaries  engaged  in  training  immature  minds, 
St.  Paul  was  forced  to  compromise  with  the  fact  that 
Christians  are  stiU  haunted  by  moral  weaknesses  and 
may  therefore  be  challenged  to  impose  upon  themselves, 
for  Christ's  sake,  a  rule  of  discipUne  which,  from  one 
point  of  view,  may  be  called  external.  He  would  un- 
doubtedly have  said  that  this  is  not  the  most  excellent 
way.  It  is  at  best  an  educational  contrivance.  It  still 
remains  true  that  the  Spirit  has  made  possible  a  higher 
type  of  morahty,  and  this  purer  hfe  is  steadily  gaining 
control  of  all  by  whom  the  Spirit  has  been  received. 

Once  more,  the  new  moral  dynamic  provided  by  Chris- 
tianity is  owing  to  the  place  given  to  the  personahty  of 
Jesus.  Christian  morahty  was  fixed,  for  good  and  all, 
by  His  precepts  and  His  character.  Attention  was  thus 
called  to  a  great  new  reahty  strange  ahke  to  Judaism  and 
paganism,  viz.  a  Life  incomparable  for  clearness  of  moral 
perception  and  strength  of  will.  Here  was  One  whose 
moral  powers  had  never  been  overtaxed.  His  words 
fell  on  conscience  with  inescapable  truth  and  had  as  their 
historical  coefficient  a  personal  career  in  perfect  harmony 
with  their  demands.  Men  felt  they  had  no  choice  but  to 
revere  Him  and  seek  His  fellowship,  in  the  hope  of  them- 
selves coming  to  five  in  the  clear  hght,  untouched  by 
moral  darkness,  where  He  hved.  It  was  found  that  He 
never  disappointed  trust,  never  failed  to  lend  that  strong 
inspiration  upon  which  weaker  natures  count.  '  Thou 
hast  reason,'  said  Marcus  Aurehus,  '  if  reason  does  its 
work,  what  else  dost  thou  require  ? '  That  is  moral 
philosophy  ;  but  the  name  of  Jesus,  as  if  by  the  touch  of 
some  heavenly  alchemy,  transforms  it  into   a  rehgion.* 

*  '  It  ia  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnate  Logos  that  constitutes  the  funda« 
mental  difference  between  Christianity  and  Stoioiam  '  (Adam,  VUaliijf  of 
PUaoni*m,  p.  181). 


150     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

His  known  personality  furnished  the  driving  power  which 
for  so  many  ages  has  taught  men  so  to  Hve  that  He  might 
approve  their  Hfe.  '  No  one,'  says  Justin,  explaining 
the  difference  Christ  had  made,  '  trusted  in  Socrates  so 
as  to  die  for  this  doctrine  ;  but  in  Christ  .  .  .  not  only 
philosophers  and  scholars  beheved,  but  also  artisans 
and  people  quite  uneducated,  despising  both  glory,  and 
fear,  and  death.'  ^ 

When  we  ask  precisely  how  the  fact  of  Jesus  has  touched 
morahty  with  creative  inspiration,  the  answer  is  so  very 
important  as  to  be  worth  careful  study.  It  has  done  so, 
first  of  all,  I  think,  by  quickening  behef  in  the  reahty 
of  goodness.  In  Him  the  sense  of  commanding  duty  lies 
upon  all  life  ;  the  model  and  the  impulse  of  all  duty  He 
carried  in  His  own  filial  heart.  He  does  not,  hke  Socrates, 
argue  for  righteousness  on  abstract  principles,  or  on  the 
ground  of  its  utiUty  ;  there  is  no  word  of  that  in  all 
the  Gospels.  But  He  moved  before  men  in  the  perfect 
severity  of  holiness  and  the  perfect  tenderness  of  love  ;  and 
in  view  of  this  career,  men  became  convinced  that  the 
highest  goodness  is  no  mere  ideal  but  concrete  and  actual 
Hfe,  which  not  all  the  obstacles  of  social  evij  or  seeming 
fatalities  of  nature  could  prevent  from  taking  form  here 
in  our  midst.  Through  Him,  their  minds  opened  to  faith 
in  God  as  the  Power  of  Goodness  in  and  over  all  things. 
But  there  is  no  more  effective  stimulus  to  good  Hfe  than 
the  conviction  that  right  has  power  to  be,  as  well  as 
authority.  To  aboHsh  moral  scepticism,  to  persuade 
men  that  goodness  is  worth  trying  for,  and  that  in  the 
deepest  of  all  senses  the  drift  of  the  universe  is  in  its 
favour,  to  prove  that  utter  unselfishness  is  possible  because 
it  once  was  real — this  must  add  incalculably  to  the  moral 
reserves  of  human  hfe.  At  this  point  there  emerges 
yet  again  the  pecuHar  strength  of  a  historic  faith. 

Secondly,  the  person  of  Jesus  provides  a  legitimate 
object  of  imitation.     Long  before  He  came,  the  felt  in- 

*  Apology,  ii.  10. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  151 

adequacy  of  precepts  and  oracles  had  created  the  desire 
to  see  a  picture  of  the  good  Ufe  in  flesh  and  blood  which 
might  exert  a  contagious  power.  Epicureans  found  the 
Perfect  Man  in  Epicurus.  Later  Greek  ethics  reveals 
an  ever-increasing  disposition  to  personify  the  ethical 
ideal,  and  the  search  for  great  examples  became  still 
keener  in  the  Hellenistic  age.  Seneca  bids  Lucihus  keep 
always  before  him  the  mental  portrait  of  some  upright 
man  and  so  live  as  if  he  were  uninterruptedly  in  his  presence. 
Still,  pagan  models  failed  to  satisfy,  and  a  widely-spread 
feeling  prevailed  that  the  exemplar  of  humanity  was  not 
yet  in  sight. ^  In  a  famihar  sentence  Seneca  uttered 
the  thought  of  many  hearts  :  '  Where  shall  he  be  found 
whom  we  have  so  many  centuries  been  seeking  ?  '  ^ 

The  imitation  of  Christ — which  is  of  course  at  bottom 
something  much  deeper  than  imitation  because  it  is  union 
with  His  spirit  and  BUs  Ufe — has  in  the  Christian  past 
suppUed  one  of  the  most  potent  ethical  incentives.  To 
follow  Jesus  has  been  felt  to  be  a  brief  epitome  of  the  best 
Ufe.  '  In  His  example/  one  has  said,  '  we  see  that  the 
love  which  must  animate  the  hfe  of  true  power,  must 
persist  in  the  face  of  all  possible  animosity  and  discourage- 
ment, in  the  face  of  torture  and  death,  and  even  the  sense 
of  desertion  by  the  God  of  love.'  '  No  categorical  im- 
perative grips  men  with  such  vividness  or  energy,  or  with 
such  a  personal  claim,  as  the  spectacle  of  the  very  Grood 
itself  concretely  embodied.  Doubtless  even  this  truth 
has  been  perverted  into  legalism.  Over  and  over  again 
the  demand  has  been  made  that  imitation  should  cover 
details  of  conduct,  even  of  food  and  dress  ;  and  yet,  when 
these  eccentricities  have  been  put  aside,  we  may  seriously 

*  '  Socijates,'  writes  Dean  Rashdall,  '  died  a  martyr  to  truth  and  civic 
duty  :  yet  in  the  Phaedo  Socrates  drives  his  wife  and  children  from  the 
room  with  something  like  brutality  that  his  last  moments  might  be  spent 
in  undisturbed  philosophical  converse  with  his  male  friends  '  (Conscience 
and  Christ,  p.  84).  It  is  only  fair  to  add  that  Prof.  A.  E.  Taylor 
dismisses  this  curtly  as  '  pulpit-rhetoric  '  {Plato's  Biography  of  Socrates, 
p.  14). 

•  de  tranq.  animi,  7.  4.  •  Coneerning  Praytr,  p.  180. 


152     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

define  Christian  morality  as  doing  as  Christ  did,  i.e.  as 
free  conscious  obedience  guided  and  inspired  by  trust 
in  the  Father.  Our  ideal  is  more  and  more  fuUy  to  exhibit 
the  ethical  qualities  found  in  Jesus. 

Nor  can  we  forget  the  singular  benefit  which  has  accrued 
to  man  from  that  aspect  of  Jesus'  example  which  is  not 
so  much  stimulating  as  educative.  In  comparing  one 
stage  of  moral  progress  with  another,  we  rightly  consider 
increased  clarity  of  vision  in  the  ethical  field  as  itself 
an  important  feature  of  progress.  And  the  influence 
of  Jesus,  as  His  life  shines  upon  the  world  from  the  pages 
of  the  New  Testament,  has  played  continuously  on  the 
human  mind  for  the  expulsion  of  culpable  ignorance, 
or  complacent  acquiescence  in  false  ethical  tradition,  as 
well  as,  in  a  positive  sense,  for  the  suggestion  of  new 
thoughts  and  fresh  visions  of  the  course  of  duty.  In 
short,  it  has  persuaded  men  not  only  to  do  right,  but  to 
find  out  what  is  right.  The  contemplation  of  Jesus  will 
continue  to  yield  a  rich  harvest  of  moral  stimulus,  but 
it  will  do  more  ;  it  will  (and  this  is  equally  desirable) 
steadily  afford  a  fount  of  authentic  moral  illumination. 

Thus  from  the  days  of  the  Gospels  till  now  the  imita- 
tion of  Christ,  the  Man  par  excellence,  has  been  one  of  the 
most  animating  and  persuasive  sources  of  the  best  human 
conduct.  Just  because  He  whom  Christians  seek  to 
imitate  is  their  Saviour,  the  more  purely  ethical  springs  of 
action  have  been  affected  by  profoundly  religious  feeling.  It 
has  proved  to  be  part  of  the  available  moral  resource 
of  Christianity  that  beHevers  find  themselves  in  touch 
with,  and  quickened  by,  the  sympathy  of  Jesus  their 
Pattern,  who  shares  both  God's  fife  and  ours.  In  His 
Hfe,  and  supremely  in  His  passion — its  unselfishness, 
its  heroism,  its  divine  patience — the  moral  standard 
confronts  men  with  a  more  arresting  urgency,  is  more 
real,  sure,  and  near  to  their  minds ,  than  elsewhere  in  the 
past. 

In  the  third  place,  Jesus  has  evoked  in  countless  hearts 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  153 

the  passion  of  grateful  love.  '  Here,'  writes  Mr.  Montefiore» 
'  was  a  new  motive,  which  has  been  of  tremendous  power 
and  effect  in  the  religious  history  of  the  world.'  ^  To  the 
psychologist,  bent  on  discovering  exactly  why  men  do 
one  thing  and  not  another,  and  what  the  tie  is  between 
faith  and  conduct,  this  is  exceptionally  important.  The 
influence  of  Christianity  on  the  emotions  has  never,  so 
far  as  I  know,  been  studied  carefully  ;  but  its  significance 
for  the  history  of  morals  can  scarcely  be  overrated.  Pagan 
religion  in  Greece  and  Rome  conspicuously  failed  to 
generate  ethical  enthusiasm.  Even  Greek  ethics  fell 
short  of  success  largely  on  account  of  its  gnostic  or  in- 
tellectuahstic  temper,  to  which  knowledge  and  virtue 
were  synonyms  and  the  affective  hfe  tended  to  rank  as 
neghgible.  At  the  birth  of  Christianity,  however,  there 
somehow  occurred  a  new  production  and  Hberation  of 
the  hfe  of  feeUng  that  reacted  instantly,  and  with  bene- 
ficent results,  on  zeal  for  righteousness.  The  will,  students 
of  mind  tell  us,  is  impelled  by  feefing -motives  ;  by  joy 
and  sorrow,  by  hope  and  fear,  by  love  and  hatred.  And 
the  Gospel  changed  life  radically  by  setting  free  emotions 
of  joy  and  hope  and  love,  which  submerged  the  contrary 
feelings  of  care,  fear  and  hatred,  and  diffused  a  moral 
sunshine  in  which  goodness  could  rise  and  flourish. 

In  particular,  loving  gratitude  to  Christ  was  a  con- 
straining power.  Gratitude  is  more  than  appreciation  ; 
as  has  been  said,  it  rescues  appreciation  '  from  being  the 
mere  dilettanteism  of  the  connoisseur.'  ^  Who  can  estimate 
the  moral  energy  produced  by  thankfulness  to  Christ 
for  His  great  act  of  love  at  Calvary  ?  Who  can  doubt 
that  a  hfe  in  which  the  appeal  of  the  Cross  had  created 
a  commanding  sense  of  indebtedness  to  the  Crucified 
would  inevitably,  even  if  slowly,  acquire  a  moral  quaUty 
resembhng  Jesus'  own  nature  ?  It  is  as  certain  as  any- 
thing can  be  that  gratitude  for  Divine  favour  did  not 

*  The  Religious  Teaching  oj  Jestte,  pp.  132  f. 
'  Phillips  Brooks,  The  Influence  of  Je»us,  p.  28. 


164     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

begin  to  be  an  ethical  motive -power  when  Christianity 
appeared,  but  it  is  also  certain  that  its  intensity  and 
power  then  rose  to  a  point  never  before  attained.  If 
it  be  said  that  all  such  emotions  are  essentially  fleeting, 
the  rejoinder  is  that  they  may  be  indefinitely  reproduced 
by  renewed  contemplation  of  Jesus,  who  is  an  unchanging 
part  of  reality,  and  that  by  degrees  they  tend  to  create 
a  permanent  mental  atmosphere  whose  reflex  action  on 
character  is  of  the  most  positive  kind. 

No  one,  I  suppose,  can  read  the  Gospels  and  not  perceive 
that  Christian  morals,  as  set  forth  in  Jesus,  have  gained 
immensely  by  their  new  simplicity.  Goodness  may  still 
be  difficult,  but  at  any  rate  it  is  now  easily  recognisable. 
First  things  are  first,  and  extemaUties  recede  into  the 
background.  Many  points  that  fill  a  large  place  in  the 
Pharisaic  programme  do  not  count  for  Jesus.  Fasting 
and  ritual  may  be  convenient,  but  they  are  not  imiversally 
incumbent ;  they  are  not  duties  in  the  sense  of  being 
necessary  expressions  of  the  law  of  Love,  the  will  of  God. 
For  Jesus  there  is  a  single  end  of  Hfe.  The  aim  of  all  is 
one,  with  every  trace  of  confusing  multipHcity  in  moral 
intention  once  for  all  eUminated,  and  isolable  precepts 
are  but  vivid  illustrations  of  how  the  Father's  child  will 
behave  when  acting  in  conformity  with  his  new  nature. 
How  far  different  this  was  from  the  Rabbinic,  and  even 
the  Stoic,  tendency  to  multiply  rules  for  the  conduct  of 
human  Hfe  is  a  thought  so  familiar  that  I  will  not  dwell 
on  it.  By  its  simpHcity  the  Christian  ideal  of  love  offers 
a  practical  and  consistent  criterion  of  all  action.  Not 
only  does  it  furnish  a  standard  by  which  to  measure  the 
'  happiness  '  in  which  eudaemonism  places  the  end  of  aU 
action  rightly  called  moral ;  it  likewise  provides  the  last 
test  of  the  '  progress  '  which  evolutionary  ethics  definitely 
fixes  on  as  the  immanent  significance  of  all  history,  thereby 
virtually  identifying  civilisation  and  moraUty.  For  not 
only  does  the  law  of  Love  enable  us  to  distinguish  change 
from  progress ;  by  its  rehgious  character  it  also  justifies 


\.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  155 

the  faith  that  history  is,  on  the  whole,  an  ever-increasing 
manifestation  of  the  good. 

In  this  section  of  the  argument,  I  have  in  the  main 
been  dealing  with  the  distinctively  religious  quality  of 
Christian  ethic.  Of  this  no  better  instance  could  be 
found  than  the  place  it  gives,  in  the  life  of  personality, 
to  Work.  We  search  vainly  in  Hellenism  for  any  acknow- 
ledgment of  work  as  a  vital  factor  in  moral  life,  any  ex- 
pression of  the  toiler's  personal  joy  in  his  toil.^  The  Greek 
view  of  the  ideal  career  as  one  of  leisure  unspoiled  by 
care  or  labour,  save  those  of  philosophy  or  statesmanship, 
still  prevailed.  And  to  the  Indian  mind  the  world  is 
too  unreal,  too  fleeting  and  unworthy,  to  have  spent  on 
it  the  thought  and  pains  of  the  human  spirit.  But 
Christianity  carried  over  from  Judaism  an  honourable  view 
of  labour,  and  raised  it  to  the  highest  level  by  representing 
man  as  the  fellow-worker  of  God,  Himself  the  great  worker. 
'  I  have  finished  the  work  Thou  hast  given  me  to  do ' 
is  Jesus'  claim.*  This  is  a  moral  principle  which  has 
transformed  many  values.  In  the  light  of  Christ's  ex- 
perience the  world  began  to  see  that  fidelity  to  vocation 
is  not  attached  to  religious  faith  by  any  fortuitous  or  ex- 
ternal bond  ;  rather  it  forms  the  only  ethical  medium 
in  which  religious  faith  can  Uve. 

Our  final  problem  is  concerned  with  the  success  of 
Christianity  in  its  great  moral  enterprise.  Has  it  realised 
its  new  ideal  to  any  purpose,  and  are  there  substantia] 
grounds  for  the  contention  that  its  ideal  will  in  the  future 
be  perfectly  reaUsed  ? 

It  is  much  too  often  overlooked  that  in  what  is  perhaps 
the  profoundest  sense  of  all  the  Christian  ideal  can  never, 
at  least  in  the  present  world -order,  be  attained.  Part 
of  its  vital  meaning  is  that  it  should  be  transcendent, 
not  immanent   merely :     ever   securing   an   approximate 

^  This  is  to  some  extent  a  declension  from  Hesiod,  for  whom  toil  has  a 
Divine  sanction.  '  John  xvii.  4. 


156     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

realisation  in  the  progress  we  make  towards  it,  yet  ever 
flying  before  us  as  we  move.  '  Christian  hoKness,'  writes 
Dr.  Figgis,  in  words  not  too  strong,  '  is  not  only  never 
achieved  in  perfection,  but  it  is  far  less  nearly  and  less 
frequently  achieved  than  the  ethical  ideas  of  Pagans  or 
Mohammedans.'  ^  And  this  is  precisely  what  we  should 
expect.  We  cannot  after  all  conceive  the  soul  as  a  static, 
fixed,  self-identical  substance,  planted  in  unchangeable 
relations  to  unchanging  moral  facts  ;  its  nature  is  to  be 
a  continuous  self-reaHsing  or  self-organising  process.  It 
is,  indeed,  as  it  grows.  To  claim  a  once-for-all -completed 
achievement  of  the  ethical  ideal,  therefore,  would  imply 
that  experience  itself  had  terminated.  Personal  relations 
would  have  ceased  to  be,  and  would  have  been  replaced  by 
something  falling  under  the  category  of  the  mechanical  or 
inanimate.  No  longer  could  the  soul  have  a  history.  Again, 
obedience  to  known  claims  of  the  Divine  will  invariably 
pours  hght  on  still  higher  obligations.  What  is  gained 
by  true  dutifulness  is  not  by  any  means  solely  a  firmer 
habit  of  duty,  but  much  more — a  deeper  and  finer  per- 
ception of  good  as  such,  with  its  higher  and  possibly 
more  painful  obHgations,  and  a  more  unerring  insight 
into  its  application  to  relationships  with  other  fives. 
There  is  a  constant  renewing  of  the  mind  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  fife  and  in  foresight  of  the  moral  possibifities 
contained  in  the  future.  Fresh  outlooks,  as  well  as  in- 
creasing power  to  fulfil  them,  are  the  fruit  of  progress. 
To  close  the  record  at  any  point,  therefore,  and  wind 
up  the  business  of  morafity,  would  necessarily  form  a 
contradiction  ;  it  would  be  to  contend  that  the  ideal 
was  now  all  reaHsed,  while  at  the  same  time,  now  as  ever 
before,  new  vistas  of  hitherto  unimagined  right  action 
would  have  opened.  '  The  practical  consciousness  of  the 
moral  ideal,'  says  T.  H.  Green,  '  impfies  the  continued 
action  in  the  individual  of  the  same  spiritual  principle 
that  has  yielded  those  forms  of  Ufe  and  character  which 

'  Ckurche*  in  tht  Modern  Stat*,  pp.  i,  A. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIC  167 

form  the  subject  of  our  moral  definitions  ;  its  continued 
action  as  at  once  compelling  dissatisfaction  with  the  im- 
perfection of  those  forms,  and  creating  a  sensibility  to  the 
suggestions  of  a  further  perfecting  of  Ufe  which  they 
contain.'  * 

Hence  it  behoves  us  all  to  use  the  words  of  soberness 
when  speaking  of  the  moral  triumphs  of  Christianity.  In 
the  deepest  sense  of  all  the  nature  of  our  reHgion  forbids 
not  only  individual  but  corporate  self-congratulation  on 
our  virtues ;  we  are  forbidden  to  believe  that  there 
has  been  all  that  quiet  steady  growth  of  brother- 
hood which  might  have  been  anticipated  from  the  new 
powers  Christ  made  available.  History  confirms  this 
penitent  reflection.  Sometimes  by  minute  investigation 
of  a  whole  period,  sometimes  by  the  light  of  an  awful 
and  unmistakable  conflagration,  illumining  the  world, 
it  reveals  the  total  absence  from  vast  stretches  of  human 
life  at  once  of  love  and  of  mutual  understanding.  But 
when  we  ask  whether  the  deduction  must  be  drawn 
that,  as  a  moral  force,  Christianity  has  failed,  two  observa- 
tions are  in  place.  First,  if  Christianity  has  failed  it  is 
only  in  the  sense  that  it  has  not  so  far  prevailed  on  the 
majority  of  mankind  to  put  it  to  the  proof.  The  ethic 
demanded  and  inspired  by  Jesus  will  never  fill  the  world, 
so  to  say,  by  spontaneous  generation  ;  consecrated  men 
and  women  must,  one  by  one,  give  themselves  to  the  task 
of  receiving  its  powers  and  actualising  its  great  precepts. 
Secondly,  there  is  substantial  ground  for  hope  in  the  ever- 
renewed  penitence  and  self -distrust  of  Christendom.  All 
is  not  lost  while  men  remain  so  poignantly  aware  of  the 
wide  gulf  between  reality  and  the  acknowledged  ideal. 

How  far  the  Christian  religion  has  elevated  moral  life 
above  the  point  to  which  pre-Christian  ethical  forces 
would  of  themselves  have  carried  it,  is  a  computation 
almost  as  confused  and  unrewarding  as  that  in  which 
optimists    and    pessimists    delightedly    engage    with    the 

*  Prolegomena  to  Ethics,  p.  3. 


158     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

hope  of  determining  whether  the  world's  balance  of 
happiness  is  on  the  right  or  the  wrong  side.  But  we 
may  venture  the  statement,  without  fear  of  refutation, 
that  wherever  Christians  have  brought  their  faith  tc  bear 
on  their  conscience,  the  results  have  been  significant.  In 
numberless  instances  the  higher  moraUty  of  Christian 
people  has  been  by  far  the  most  powerful  missionary 
appeal  they  could  have  made  to  their  environment.  In 
the  first  century  the  Gospel  exerted  its  attraction  largely 
through  Christian  lives,  in  which  a  new  ethical  force 
appeared  ;  and  ever  since  the  beauty  of  holiness,  its  flame 
fit  from  Jesus,  has  made  its  convincing  impression.  But 
I  prefer  in  conclusion  to  emphasise  two  points  : 

(1)  The  Christian  principle  contains  vast  resources 
which  as  yet  are  unexhausted  and  even  unexplored.  For 
doubt  whether  the  distinctively  Christian  ethic  is  a  new 
thing  in  great  measure  results  from  our  slow  discovery  of 
the  implications  of  its  central  idea  :  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself.  The  ideal,  whether  in  the  New 
Testament  or  to-day,  is  not  in  the  least  a  finished  article  ; 
it  is  a  growing,  expanding  principle,  and  of  the  Church's 
moral  achievement  in  history  it  is  as  true  as  of  her  eschato- 
logical  consummation  that  '  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what 
we  shall  be.'  ^ 

At  the  present  moment  there  is  a  keen  feeling  that 
where  Christianity  has  still  to  prove  itself  is  the  sphere 
of  corporate  relationships.  Not  that  we  need  fear  the 
issue.  Jesus  provided  no  elaborated  social  ethic  ;  He 
gave  a  seed  of  faith,  calHng  men  brothers  because  aU  of 
them  Grod's  sons,  and  this  impulse  He  committed  to  de- 
velopment as  its  law  of  fife.  Since  then  there  has  been 
*  a  process,  a  direction  or  movement,  a  running  stream 
of  aspiration,  effort,  and  achievement — a  thing  ever 
becoming,  and  never  become.'  No  such  thing  as  a 
stationary  ideal  is  erected,  closing  the  way  of  progress. 
Christianised  man  is  committed  to  his  own  experiments  ; 

»  I  John  iii.  2. 


v.]  THE  CHRISTIAN  ETHIO  159 

to  every  kind  of  ethical  application,  adaptation,  correction, 
and  revision  of  experience.  There  can  be  no  guarantee 
beforehand  that  all  such  experiments  will  strike  the  true 
line.  No  mode  exists  of  knowing  whether  we  are  on  the 
way  to  truth  except  the  process  of  insight  deepened  by 
experience.  Probably  few  will  question  that  some  at  least 
of  these  developments  are  legitimate  and  lasting — for 
example,  international  law,  arbitration,  and  in  a  real 
sense,  sociahsm.  Progress  in  the  past  centuries  entitles 
reasonable  men  to  hope  steadily  for  the  future,  and  trust 
in  the  Father  countersigns  and  glorifies  the  hope.  We 
are  not  wrong  in  believing  that  Jesus  will  reign  over  '  those 
many  relations  of  Hfe  in  which  our  responsibihty  is  shared 
with  others  and  yet  is  real.'  And  though  we  need  not 
hold  that  the  word  will  necessarily  come  through  professedly 
Christian  men,  since  the  highest  ethical  standards  are 
often  found  outside  rehgious  circles,  yet,  be  it  spoken 
through  believer  or  imbehever,  we  may  well  be  convinced 
that  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  loill  speak  the  last  word  on  the 
morality  of  industry,  commerce,  civic  government,  national 
politics,  international  affairs.  The  truth  that  in  Christ 
there  is  neither  bond  nor  free  failed  to  aboHsh  slavery 
in  the  hfe  time  of  the  apostles,  but  slavery  did  disappear 
before  the  spread  of  Christian  feehng.  And  similarly, 
as  the  Gospel  stopped  gladiatorial  conflicts,  we  may  dare 
to  think  it  will  stop  war.  AU  who  follow  Christ  are 
summoned  to  grapple  with  these  problems — ^not  without 
the  reinforcement  of  all  wise  and  energetic  'secular'  minds — 
in  the  conviction  that  in  Christ's  rehgion  they  possess  the 
secret  of  social  health,  and  that  any  society  or  world- 
civiMsation  that  scouts  His  way  of  hfe,  and  continues 
to  build  on  selfishness,  must  go  down  in  ruin. 

(2)  The  Kingdom  of  God,  which  is  as  much  moral  as 
rehgious,  has  before  it  the  prospect  of  eternity.  When 
Jesus  gathered  the  disciples  round  Him,  in  a  fellowship 
of  faith  and  love,  He  called  into  existence  a  society  which 
is  potentially  co-terminous  with  the  human  race,  but  a 


160     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

society  which  can  never  become  adequate  to  its  own 
idea  within  the  conditions  of  time  and  space.  The  realisa- 
tion of  such  absolute  values  as  those  which  the  Kingdom 
promotes  and  embodies,  just  because  they  are  values  reach- 
ing beyond  the  power  of  law  or  change,  must  demand 
a  transcendent  world-order  on  the  farther  side  of  death 
which  shall  bring  to  perfection  the  germs  and  beginnings 
of  earthly  good,  in  a  complete  union  of  all  members  of 
the  Kingdom  with  God.  Hence  it  is  in  view  of  this  infinite 
hope  that  we  must  estimate  the  eventual  success  of 
Christian  moral  endeavour.'  Whatever  is  distinctive  and 
supreme  in  the  faith  concerning  eternal  Hfe  created  by 
Jesus,  communicates  its  own  infinitude  to  Christian  belief 
in  human  progress,  ahke  for  the  individual  and  for  the 
Divine  community  apart  from  which  the  individual  is 
unreal. 

^  '  The  light  of  heaven,  using  the  term  heaven  as  a  little  child  uses  it, 
lies  on  every  particle  of  genoine  C!hrLiti«n  morality  *  (Denney,  Expositor, 
Bizth  feriea,  toL  ir.  p.  434). 


▼l3  the  absoluteness  of  CHRISTIANITY  161 


LECTURE  VI 

THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

In  the  foregoing  lectures  we  have  been  engaged  with  an 
inquiry,  too  brief  and  imperfect  I  am  well  aware,  into  the 
originality  of  the  Christian  message.  We  have  striven 
to  isolate  the  new  elements  in  the  Christian  view  of  God, 
of  the  Divine  saving  action,  of  the  redeemed  experience, 
and  of  the  ethic  inspired  by  the  Grospel.  I  trust  we  may 
claim  that  in  some  real  measure  the  novelty  and  unpre- 
cedented range  of  Christian  conviction  about  all  these 
crucial  matters  has  been  brought  out.  The  new  reUgion 
is  in  no  sense  a  reproduction  or  revised  version  of  older 
faiths.  Pre-existing  ideas,  when  they  reappear,  enter 
into  new  combinations  and  gather  new  significance,  while 
the  great  fact  of  Jesus  Christ  imparts  originaUty  and 
distinctiveness  to  the  whole. 

With  all  this  behind  us,  however,  a  fresh  and  extremely 
formidable  problem  emerges.  Assuming  the  newness  of 
the  Gospel,  as  irreducible  to  tl;ie  plane  of  earher  ethnic 
faiths,  can  we  further  say  that  this  new  Gospel  is 
*  absolute '  ?  Is  it  Grod's  final  word  to  man  ?  It  may 
be  the  highest  rehgion  within  human  reach  at  the  moment, 
but  may  it  not  eventually  be  displaced  by  a  reUgion  higher 
still  ?  '  Art  Thou  He  that  should  come,  or  do  we  look 
for  another  ?  '  Doubtless  the  Gospel  was  an  innovation 
in  the  first  century,  and  may  still  be  imrivalled  ;  but 
are  we  justified  in  concluding  that  it  will  never  be  ren- 
dered obsolete  by  the  advent  of  a  revelation  more 
perfectly  suited  to  the  spiritual  needs  of  men  ?  This 
question  is  of  such  importance  that  any  serious  discussion 


162     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

of  the  originality  of  the  Gospel  must,  in  the  interest  of 
faith  not  less  than  of  theory,  be  accompanied  and  in  one 
sense  completed  by  an  investigation  of  its  finality.  To 
this  topic  let  us  now  turn. 

One  prehminary  point  we  may  glance  at,  before  em- 
barking on  our  main  business  All  of  us  agree  that 
Christians  did  not  cease  to  appropriate  reKgious  truth 
when  the  Apostolic  Age  was  over.  It  is  not  to  be  thought 
of  that  within  at  most  three  generations  the  whole  sigm- 
ficance  of  Christ  should  have  been  understood  and  trans- 
mitted to  posterity,  Divine  enhghtenment  then  ceasing, 
or  that  Christianity  could  have  retained  its  spiritual 
character  under  conditions  so  mechanical.  Nor  does 
the  New  Testament  suggest  anything  of  the  kind. 
Especially  in  the  Johannine  conception  of  the  Spirit, 
provision  is  made  for  an  ever-advancing  appreciation 
of  the  person  of  Jesus.  The  Spirit,  it  is  promised,  will 
guide  behevers  into  all  truth.  The  Church  has  never 
quite  forgotten  this  promise  ;  we  may  perhaps  say  that 
the  succession  has  never  altogether  failed  of  those  who 
maintain  that  new  Ught  will  always  continue  to  break 
out  from  the  Word  of  God.  Even  within  the  Roman 
Church  thinkers  like  Newman  have  risen  up  to  urge  that 
doctrine  has  developed  positively  as  the  centuries  moved 
on  ;  doctrine,  that  is  to  say,  is  unfolded  which  was  not  there 
before,  though  the  new  truth  harmonises  with  the  original 
revelation.  It  has  been  found  nearly  impossible  to  flout 
experience  by  denying  all  growth  in  spiritual  knowledge, 
in  moral  insight,  in  altruistic  and  missionary  impulse, 
or  by  ignoring  the  fact  that  such  growth  is  ultimately 
traceable  to  Grod.  from  whom  all  strong  and  holy  thoughts 
proceed. 

Is  this  a  new  revelation,  or  is  it  solely  a  better  apprehen- 
sion of  the  unique  revelation  contained  in  Christ  ?  I  own 
this  strikes  me  as  but  a  matter  of  words.  If  the  present- 
day  Christian  mind  is  in  possession  at  any  point  of  a  wider 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY  163 

or  completer  understanding  of  what  the  Gospel  implies 
for  human  redemption,  this  does  not  mean  that  Christ 
has  been  transcended  ;  it  means  simply  that  the  Church 
is  gradually  deciphering  the  content  of  His  significance. 
In  that  sense,  if  we  care  to  use  the  word,  it  is  a  new  revela- 
tion, adapted  to  the  world's  ever-changing  needs.  We 
may  fairly  let  ourselves  be  guided  by  the  instinct  of  the 
Fourth  EvangeUst.  According  to  his  mind,  there  is  nothing 
accidental  or  alarming  in  a  continuous  advance  beyond 
the  traditions  of  the  past.  '  The  Spirit  is  the  perennial 
source  of  new  revelation,  and  yet  this  new  revelation  is 
only  the  unfolding,  ever  more  largely  and  clearly,  of  what 
has  already  been  imparted  in  the  hfe  of  Jesus.  All  our 
knowledge  of  Grod  and  His  truth  is  ultimately  derived 
from  the  historical  manifestation,  which  conveys  a  dif- 
ferent message  to  each  succeeding  time,  but  can  never  be 
superseded.'  ^  The  mind  of  Christ  is  perpetuated  in  His 
disciples,  interpreting  the  Hfe  and  truth  He  brought  in 
ever  new  forms.  But  that  which  thus  originates  is  not  a 
new  reUgion. 

Premising  then  the  truth  of  Christianity  as  the  Grospel 
of  sonship,  of  unrestricted  access  to  the  Father,  mediated 
through  Jesus,  we  have  to  ask  whether  of  this  Grospel 
we  can  predicate  absolute  value.  Have  we  good  grounds 
for  the  conviction  that  our  religion  is  unimprovable  ^  and 
will  never  be  antiquated  by  the  rise  of  a  better  faith  ? 

The  conviction  just  formulated  has  been  attacked  from 
three  distinct  points  of  view.     It  may  be  said,  first,  an 

»  E.  F.  Scott,  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  357. 

"  There  is  certainly  nothing  in  the  history  of  Christianity  that  corre- 
sponds to  the  improvement  in  pagan  cults  thus  described  by  Dill :  '  In 
times  of  moral  renovation,  and  in  face  of  powerful  spiritual  rivalries,  a 
religion  may  purge  itself  of  the  impurities  of  youth.  Religious  systems 
may  also  be  elevated  by  the  growing  refinement  of  the  society  to  which 
they  minister.  It  is  only  thus  that  we  can  explain  the  undoubted  fact 
that  the  Phrygian  and  Egyptian  worships,  originally  tainted  with  the 
grossness  of  naturalism,  became  vehicles  of  a  warm  religious  emotion, 
and  provided  a  stimulus  to  a  higher  life.  The  idealism  of  humanity,  by 
a  strange  alchemy,  can  marvellously  transform  the  most  unpromising 
materials '  (quoted  by  Angus,  Environment  of  Early  Christianity,  pp.  89-90). 


164     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

absolute  religion  is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  Or  secondly 
the  absolute  religion,  which  does  exist,  is  not  Christianity, 
but  either  Judaism  or  Buddhism.  Or  thirdly,  the  absolute 
religion  has  not  yet  appeared,  but  in  due  course  it  will 
appear  and  will  prove  to  be  an  amalgam  of  Christianity 
and  some  other  faith.  Buddhism  for  choice.  These 
positions  we  must  examine  one  by  one. 

(1)  The  case  against  the  possibihty  of  an  absolute 
reUgion  may  be  summarised  as  follows  BeHef  in  an 
absolute  reUgion,  it  may  be  said,  presupposes  that  the 
development  of  religion  on  through  its  successive  forms 
means,  or  at  all  events  is  accompanied  by,  a  steady  increase 
in  the  truth  of  its  content — that  is,  of  its  religious  and 
ethical  affirmations.  Now  there  exists  no  measure  of  the 
truth  of  its  content  unless  we  can  lay  our  hand  on  a  fixed 
unchanging  conception  of  what  religion  essentially  is, 
by  which  the  approximating  truth  of  these  successive 
forms  can  be  gauged.  It  has  indeed  often  been  contended 
that  we  do  possess  this  unchanging  conception  ;  but  on 
examination  it  invariably  turns  out  to  be  simply  a  logical 
generahsation  drawn  from  actually  existing  forms  of  faith. 
Once  made,  this  generahsation  has  illegitimately  been 
invested  with  absoluteness.  Manifestly  there  has  been 
a  circular  argument.  The  supposedly  absolute  standard 
is  itself  derived  from  the  historical  phenomena  which  it 
apparently  enables  us  to  rank  as  relative  ;  not  only  so, 
in  one  particular  case  we  claim  that  the  absolute  standard 
has  been  satisfied,  yet  this  particular  is  equally  relative 
with  the  others.  Thus  no  absolute  norm  of  what  reUgion 
is  exists,  and  therefore  no  absolute  rehgion. 

Again,  modem  thought  tends  to  find  the  primary  and 
fundamental  factor  of  religion  not  in  idea  or  dogma, 
but  in  the  soul's  experience.  But  at  this  point  of  view^ 
the  notion  of  absoluteness  or  finaUty  is  unthinkable  ;  it 
would  imply  that  experience,  which  is  never-ending,  was 
somehow  closed.  Or,  to  put  it  otherwise,  does  not  an 
absolute  religion  mean  one  which  is  the  same  for  every- 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUIENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  165 

body  ?  And  has  not  James  in  his  captivating  Gifford 
Lectures  demonstrated  the  infinite  variety  of  types  of  pious 
Ufe  ?  Experiences  so  different  cannot  possibly  be  reduced 
to  a  common  denominator  How,  for  example,  shall  the 
once-born  and  the  twice-born  house  together  in  a  single  faith? 
How  shall  the  mystic  live  under  the  same  roof  with  the 
man  whose  religion  runs  to  moraUsm  ?  No  single  norm 
can  be  conceived  by  which  rehgion  everywhere  should 
be  valued  and  corrected.  By  demanding  conformity  we 
violate  the  overflowing  freedom  of  Hfe. 

At  the  moment  I  can  only  reply  as  follows.  The  first 
objection  rests  upon  two  assumptions,  one  logical,  the 
other  rehgious.  To  begin  with,  it  assumes  that  if  a  religion 
cannot  be  logically  proved  absolute,  then  it  is  not  absolute. 
To  this  we  reply  by  granting  unreservedly  that  irresistible 
logical  proof  of  the  finality  of  the  Gospel  cannot  be  given, 
while,  as  we  shall  see  later,  Christianity  may  be  final 
notwithstanding.  Further,  in  this  particular  form  of  the 
rejection  of  the  Gospel's  claim  to  absoluteness,  it  is  assumed 
that  the  Gospel  is  not  true.  It  is  very  doubtful  whether 
any  one  who  understands  what  Jesus  meant  by  the  Father- 
hood of  God,  and  who  beHeves  Jesus'  meaning  to  be 
objectively  valid  in  the  sense  that  there  is  just  such  a 
Father  in  heaven  as  He  proclaimed,  can  inteUigibly  hold 
that  this  truth  could  be  replaced  by  something  better. 
Here  then  we  have  a  position  antagonistic  to  the  absolute- 
ness of  Christianity  because  it  is  antagonistic  to  Christianity 
itself. 

The  second  objection  really  denies  that  behef  is  an 
element  of  rehgion,  and  this  I  must  take  leave  to  put 
aside  without  discussion  It  is  out  of  harmony  with  the 
results  of  the  best  modem  psychology.  We  may  take 
it  that  the  three  ultimate  modes  of  being  conscious,  the 
three  attitudes  of  feeling,  cognition,  and  conation,  are  all 
involved  in  a  rehgious  mood  or  act,  and  that  they  function 
as  a  concrete  unity.  For  the  rest,  I  can  only  hope  that 
when  we  come  to  ask  what  the  claim  of  Christianity  to  be 


166     ORIGINALITY  OP  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [leot. 

absolute  means,  we  shall  discover  room  in  our  faith  at  once 
for  all  highest  types  of  spiritual  experience  and  for  infinite 
progressiveness. 

(2)  It  has  been  contended  that  the  final  faith  is  not 
Christianity,  but  some  other  reUgion.  And  this  is  a  view 
which  deserves  close  attention.  Christianity,  I  beUeve, 
has  three  great  modem  rivals.  One  is  Secularism,  resting 
on  agnosticism  as  its  theoretic  basis — the  doctrine,  in 
short,  that  nothing  higher  or  better  than  human  beings 
as  they  are,  is  known  to  exist.  But  this  is  not  a  reUgion 
at  all,  and  we  may  leave  it  undiscussed.  The  second 
rival  is  Judaism,  which  has  already  been  considered  at 
various  points  in  the  argument.  Buddhism  remains  as 
the  third — a  pantheistic  type  of  faith,  or  view  of  the  world, 
not  without  a  strong  attraction  for  some  of  our  con- 
temporaries. K,  however.  Buddhism  be  found  to  stand 
on  a  lower  ethical  level  than  Christianity,  its  claim  to 
absoluteness  goes  by  the  board. 

Unfortunately  I  have  to  put  the  matter  rather  succinctly, 
and  as  my  purpose  is  to  exhibit  Buddhism  as  in  certain 
aspects  inferior  to  Christianity,  I  may  seem  to  speak  in  a 
tone  of  undue  disparagement.  But  if  we  recollect  that 
Buddhism  is  actually  older  than  Christianity  by  four 
or  five  hundred  years,  if  we  form  a  just  picture  of  the 
world  in  which  it  appeared  and  to  which  it  was  taught 
by  the  young  Indian  prince,  Gautama,  who  was  to  become 
the  Buddha,  how  can  we  withhold  a  tribute  of  frank 
admiration  ?  Gautama  was  a  great  and  sympathetic 
personaHty.  Sensitiveness  to  pain,  fineness  of  inner 
feehng,  and  persistent  purpose  were  perhaps  his  most 
striking  quafities,  and  nothing  can  be  more  unhistorical 
than  to  picture  him  as  a  weak  or  irresolute  nature,  or 
indeed  as  anything  but  a  man  of  singular  moral  strength 
and  constancy.  We  cannot  disregard  the  fact  that 
Buddhism  put  a  message  of  Redemption  at  its  heart, 
that  it  has  proved  itself  a  missionary  faith  on  the  great 
scale,  that  it  signaUsed  a  notable  advance  in  moraUty  by  its 


VL]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  167 

strict  prohibition  of  hatred  and  its  emphatic  commendation 
of  universal  mildness  and  forbearance,  and  that  it  insisted 
uncompromisingly  on  a  soul  cleansed  from  worldliness. 
In  view  of  this,  it  may  be  mistaken  but  it  is  not  insane 
that  it  should  have  claimed  equaUty  with  the  rehgion  we 
profess  ;  while  also  it  might  seem  to  possess  a  higher 
fitness  for  to-day  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  appeal  for  belief 
in  miracle,  and  is  throughout  rationalistically  agnostic 
in  temper.^  But  we  have  to  look  at  the  other  side.  A 
rehgion's  quaHty  is  determined  by  the  figure  who  stands 
at  its  fountainhead  ;  and  the  one  question  therefore  is, 
Which  is  greater,  Gautama  or  Jesus  ?  Which  had  more 
to  give  the  world  ?  '  Wherever  we  open  the  Gospels,' 
says  Oldenberg  in  his  standard  work  on  Buddha,  '  we 
find  the  tenderest  and  profoundest  traits  of  Jesus'  influence, 
as  it  moves  from  fife  to  fife,  to  bless,  console,  heal,  enrich, 
and  strengthen.  How  far  different  is  the  picture  which 
the  Buddhist  Church  has  kept  of  its  Master's  work — how 
infinitely  poor  in  everything  that  touches  the  secrets  of 
personal  being !  Living  humanity  is  lost  in  the  scheme, 
the  formula.  There  is  no  one  to  seek  and  comfort  the 
suffering  and  sad  :  ever  and  again  what  fills  the  eye  is  the 
pain  of  the  whole  world,  diverting  attention  from  every 
case  of  individual  pain  in  order  that  the  spirit  may  gird 
itself  for  the  journey  by  which  we  pass  beyond  all  pain.' 

Ethical  terms  require  personal  Hfe  as  their  exponent, 
and  on  a  closer  view  '  love '  means  one  thing  on  Jesus' 
Hps  but  another  on  Gautama's.  The  meaning  of  love 
for  Jesus  is  determined  by  His  Cross,  which  impHes  some- 
thing more,  and  more  efficacious,  than  abstention  from 
enmity.  The  reader  of  Buddhist  books  might  at  first 
sight  suppose  that  the  characteristic  feefing  of  this  rehgion 
is  a  high  unselfishness,  but  a  deeper  search  reveals  the  fact 
that  unselfishness  here  comiotes,  as  a  great  missionary 
puts  it,  *  not  the  yielding  of  one's  own  claims  to  the  rights 

*  For  proof  that  even  Buddhism  requires  an  act  of  faith,  see  K.  J.  Saunders 
In  the  International  Review  of  Missions,  1918,  p.  118. 


168     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

and  claims  of  others,  but  rather  the  effort  to  withdraw 
oneself,  for  what  are  ultimately  selfish  reasons,  from  all 
connection  with  the  world  of  existence  around  us.'  ^  The 
Buddhist  monk  is  a  fugitive  from  life  (and  only  the  monk 
can  really  attain  the  true  goal  of  being)  : 

•  E'en  as  the  tortoise  in  its  own  shell's  shelter 
Withdraws  its  limbs,  so  may  the  brother  holding, 
Composed,  intent,  thoughts  in  his  mind  arisen, 
Leaning  on  naught,  injuring  ne'er  his  neighbour, 
From  evil  freed  wholly,  speak  ill  of  no  man.' 

It  was  therefore  an  inconsistency  in  Gautama,  though 
a  noble  one,  that  instead  of  retiring  into  privacy  with 
his  new-found  secret,  he  resolved  to  communicate  it  to 
mankind.  Once  he  had  attained  the  supreme  insight, 
bringing  his  mind  into  a  state  in  which  it  could  see  and 
feel  the  illusory  nature  of  things,  the  logic  of  his  position 
demanded  suicide,  the  immediate  willed  entrance  on 
Nirvana.  He  lived  on,  preaching  redemption  to  others  ; 
and  scholars  have  pointed  out  how  Buddhistic  tradition 
has  marked  its  half -conscious  sense  of  the  inconsistency. 
Legend  tells  that  when  Gautama  of  his  own  motion  had 
resolved  to  enter  Nirvana,  the  supreme  God,  perceiving 
the  danger,  came  down  and  opened  his  eyes  with  S5rmpathy 
for  souls  thirsting  for  salvation.  Thus  accidentally,  in 
Buddhism  itself,  the  still  small  voice  is  heard  of  a  Divine 
Love  that  cares  for  men  and  would  have  man  care  for  his 
brother.  But  what  in  Buddhism  is  a  sudden  inconsequence 
is  for  Jesus  the  meaning  of  the  world. 

Orthodox  Buddhist  teaching,  however,  warns  men  to 
love  nothing  either  in  heaven  or  in  earth.  By  detachment 
we  escape  pain,  and  to  escape  pain  is  the  one  thing  needful. 
It  is  the  antipodes  of  the  great  command  :  '  Thou  shalt 
love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbour 
as  thyself.'  ^  Nor  do  we  find  in  Buddhism  any  coherent 
counterpart  to  that  higher  love  of  the  world — which  Grod 

'  Campbell  Gibson,  Mission  Problems,  p.  106.  '  Luke  z.  27. 


71.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  169 

Himself  loved  ^ — to  which,  in  spite  of  an  equal  dislike 
of  worldliness,  the  Grospel  has  always  pointed.  We  are 
manifestly  dealing  with  an  earher  form  of  Stoic  '  apathy.' 

Buddhism,  Hke  Christianity,  is  specifically  a  reUgion  of 
redemption,  and  in  the  forefront,  as  man's  sorest  trouble, 
it  puts  that  all-pervasive  suffering  which  is  not  an  accident 
of  Life  but  its  inseparable  core.  Now  the  Jesus  of  history 
is  far  from  minimising  pain.  Salvation  as  He  gives  it  is 
a  comprehensive  supernatural  dehverance  from  sin  and 
death  ;  it  includes  the  heahng  of  all  diseases,  the  righting 
of  all  wrongs.  But  reconciUation  with  the  Father 
is  primary.  Further,  it  was  through  pain  that  Christ 
achieved  redemption  ;  in  this  path  He  bids  disciples 
follow  in  His  steps,  thereby  assuming  that  suffering  is 
not  purely  evil  from  every  point  of  view  but  can  be  so 
received  and  inwardly  transmuted  as  to  mediate  spiritual 
gain.  But  Gautama  is  represented  as  having  begun  his 
ministry  under  an  overwhelming  impression  of  the  un- 
fathomable pain  of  the  world,  which  robbed  him  of  all 
will  to  hve.  Life,  qua  life,  is  misery  :  this  is  inherent  in 
experience  as  such  and  does  not  form  the  consequence 
or  penalty  of  anything.  Being  is  badness,  with  a  badness 
that  becomes  self-conscious  in  man  ;  and  it  is  bad  because 
suffering,  its  Uving  fibre,  flows  inevitably  from  desire, 
and  to  cease  desiring  we  must  cease  to  be.  This  fear  of 
hfe  is  terribly  sharpened  by  the  doctrine  of  reincarnation, 
according  to  which  men  have  no  prospect  but  that  of  ever 
being  bom  over  again  to  suffer  and  die,  in  ever-renewed 
separation  from  the  objects  of  love.  Hence  the  will  to 
five,  the  Ufe-lust,  must  be  totally  eradicated  if  man  is  to 
be  saved.  Everywhere  the  same  Gospel  of  sheer  negation  ; 
no  desire,  no  pain,  no  Hfe.  For  Buddhism  this  is  the  only 
available  method  of  deahng  with  the  three  character- 
istics which,  as  Hackmann  puts  it,  inhere  in  all  things, 
'  transitoriness,  misery,  and  the  lack  of  an  ego.'  ^ 

Let  there  be  no  misconception  :   what  is  proffered  here 

*  Joba  iii.  10.  '  Buddhism  U9  a  Religion,  p.  27. 


170     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

is  not,  as  with  Jesus,  the  redemption  of  Ufe,  but  redemption 
from  life  itself.  Both  Christ  and  Buddha  have  been 
described  as  conquerors  of  death,  but  manifestly  the  phrase 
bears  in  the  two  cases  an  utterly  divergent  sense.  Buddha's 
teaching  redeems  from  death  by  preparing  man  for  the 
obhteration  of  consciousness  ;  Christ  by  uniting  man  to 
the  hving  and  loving  God  (Who,  and  not  Nothingness, 
is  the  last  and  highest  reaUty)  in  a  spiritual  bond  to  which 
death  can  make  no  difference.  The  supreme  boon  offered 
by  Buddhism  is  not  eternal  Ufe  in  Grod  here  and  hereafter, 
but  '  Nirvana,'  a  word  borrowed  from  the  extinction  of  a 
lamp.     In  Nirvana 

*  to  utter  ending  comes 
This  compound  thing  of  body  and  of  mind.* 

There  has  been  infinite  discussion  as  to  the  meaning  of 
Nirvana,  but  we  are  at  least  justified  in  venturing  the 
statement  that  the  condition  indicated  by  the  term  has  no 
positive  content.  Trouble  and  pain  cease  in  Nirvana 
because  the  man  himself  ceases.  It  is  a  purely  indi- 
viduahstic  ideal ;  it  recognises  no  such  social  completion  of 
the  redeemed  Ufe  as  the  Kingdom  of  God  pictured  by  Jesus. 
And  it  is  preponderantly  negative,  with  no  place  for 
Truth,  Beauty,  Goodness.  How  widely  removed  from 
Jesus'  outlook,  '  I  am  come  that  they  may  have  fife,  and 
have  it  to  the  full '  !  ^ 

The  two  rehgions  are  also  diametrically  opposed  in  their 
views  of  the  pathway  to  redemption.  Gautama  teaches 
that  to  be  saved  is  to  escape  from  a  wretched  and  fatal 
illusion  due  to  the  depraved  action  of  our  own  minds. 
We  need  most  of  all  a  new  point  of  view.  The  Buddha 
himself  attained  the  goal  not  by  asceticism  or  ecstatic 
contemplation  but  through  calm,  penetrating,  per- 
sistent reflection — such  reflection  as  unveiled  to  him 
the  equivalence  of  hfe  and  misery.  Higher  knowledge 
leading  to  total  suppression  of  the  will  is  thus  the  secret, 

»  John  X.  10  (MoSatt). 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  171 

and  Gautama  is  '  the  Illumined.'  Man  is  cast  upon  his 
own  resources  for  salvation, in  the  sense  that  he  is  challenged 
to  gain  such  philosophic  insight  into  the  nature  of  'being 
as  will  lead  him  to  mortify  all  activities  whatsoever.  To 
be  redeemed  is  to  have  perceived  the  vanity  of  things. 
Wisdom  is  necessary,  but  a  wisdom  which  so  far  from 
inspiring  men  to  grapple  with  wrong  or  folly  bids  them 
retire  from  the  conflict ;  with  the  result  that  Buddhism 
has  scattered  the  seeds  of  death  in,  every  social  structure 
into  which  it  has  found  a  way.  Jesus  offers  us  truth  in- 
deed, but  truth  embodied  in  a  radiant  and  overmaster- 
ing personahty  :  He  appeals  to  the  will,  and  when  the  will 
fails  mobilises  the  conscience,  so  presenting  God  through- 
out as  to  evoke  and  satisfy  the  great  abiding  elements  of 
manhood — reason,  will,  and  heart.  '  All  souls  are  mine,' 
says  the  Grod  revealed  in  Christ,  not  wise  and  prudent 
thinkers  merely.  '  Repent,'  was  Jesus'  cry  as  He  began  His 
ministry  ;  '  be  instructed,'  said  Buddha.  It  is  not  the 
difference  between  truth  and  power  ;  but  between  human 
understanding  rising  by  self-stimulated  effort  to  the 
peaks  of  enhghtenment  and  such  true  insight  into  the 
character  of  God  as  means  a  new  way  of  life.  Gautama 
taught  his  doctrine  quietly  and  fruitfully  and  finished 
his  earthly  career  aged  and  honoured,  passing  gently 
into  extinction  ;  Jesus,  who  taught  not  less  persistently 
but  also  wrestled  in  agony  with  evil,  perished  on  a  cross 
after  the  most  terrible  of  deaths,  and  thereafter,  in  the 
great  words  of  St.  Paul,  was  '  installed  as  the  Son  of  God 
with  power  by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead.'  ^  It  is 
the  victory  not  of  death  over  Hfe,  but  of  faith  and  love  over 
death. 

These  characteristics  of  Buddhism,  it  may  reasonably 
be  urged,  are  all  of  them  derivable  from  its  non-theistic 
and  therefore  pessimistic  attitude  to  life.  It  is  indeed 
the  one  case  in  history  of  pessimism  appearing  as  a  refigion. 
Strictly  we  may  describe  it  either  as  philosophy  or  as 

»  Rom.  i.  4. 


172     ORIGmALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE    [lbct. 

moral  system,  and  the  second  description  is  the  better ; 
but  if  we  insist  on  calMng  it  a  religion,  it  is  at  all  events 
reUgion  without  an  object.  No  one  has  the  right  to  deny- 
that  the  Buddhist  enjoys  feelings  of  reverence  and  awe, 
of  unity,  of  harmony,  even  of  deep  peace  and  gladness  ; 
still,  such  feelings  are  unrelated  to  any  transubjective 
reaUty.  Buddhistic  Hterature,  it  is  true,  has  much  to  say 
concerning  divine  or  demonic  beings,  yet  these  are  in  no 
sense  helpers  of  man  but  part  of  the  wheel  of  life  from 
which  we  must  escape ;  hence,  whatever  may  have 
happened  later,  primitive  Buddhism  is  devoid  aUke  of 
worship  and  of  prayer.  But  in  point  of  fact  nothing  is 
more  suggestive  than  the  way  in  which  later  Buddhism 
has  reversed  the  teaching  of  its  founder.  With  the  lapse 
of  time,  as  Mr.  Saunders  has  shown,  '  Buddhism  allowed 
its  excessive  pessimism  and  its  denial  of  God  and  of  the 
soul  to  drop  into  the  background,  and  found  room  for 
trust  in  God  and  for  prayer  ;  for  heaven  and  the  hope  of 
immortahty.'  ^  Human  longing  proved  too  powerful 
an  antagonist  of  tendencies  which  its  founder  had  im- 
pressed upon  it.  Buddhism  would  die  were  it  to  return  to 
its  origins,  whereas  Christianity  springs  to  ever  new  Hfe  by 
recovering  touch  with  Jesus.  This  is  one  evidence  the 
more  that  Gautama's  position  in  Buddhism  is  by  no 
means  analogous  to  that  held  in  His  reHgion  by  Jesus 
Christ.  The  true  Buddhist  teaching  is  entirely  separable 
from  Gautama,  who  is  but  one  of  an  indeterminate  and 
unfinished  series,  but  Jesus  knows  no  more  sacred  duty 
than  to  lead  men  to  Himself. 

Looking  back,  we  may  claim  superiority  for  the  Christian 
faith  on  two  main  grounds.  First,  since  it  is  really  as  a 
system  of  ethics  that  Buddhism  must  be  judged,  we  note 
its  fundamental  ethical  steriUty.    Why  should  we  strive 

*  International  Review  of  Missions,  1911,  p.  166.  *  The  genuine  Buddhist 
ideas,'  Hackmann  declares,  *  in  their  subtle  philosophical  character  do  not 
satisfy  or  grip  the  simple  individual.  They  have  to  be  coarsened  and 
completed,  therefore,  m  order  to  meet  the  common  needs  of  humanity — 
as  for  instance  by  substituting  Paradise  for  Nirvana,  and  by  a  doctrine 
of  God  and  the  soul  *  (Buddhism  as  a  Bdigion,  p.  296). 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY  173 

for  character  or  sacrifice  present  pleasure  to  an  uncertain 
future,  if  within  a  short  span  we  shall  be  as  if  we  had 
never  been  ?  Reality  cannot  be  made  the  medium  of 
good  ;  the  ultimate  secret  of  things  is  dark,  unhappy 
Fate.  Jesus  ushers  men  into  a  life  of  boimdless  promise, 
but  here  we  see  an  end  of  all  perfection  in  the  cruel  nothing- 
ness of  existence,  a  discovery  which  cuts  the  nerve  of  all 
genuine  moral  endeavour.  Christians  beheve  that  every 
true  achievement  becomes,  as  it  were,  a  funded  part  of  the 
Divine  Kjngdom,  and  that  every  gift  obediently  used  is 
destined  to  open  in  Christ's  light  into  before  unconscious  and 
unsuspected  power  ;  but  progress  is  an  idea  which  consistent 
Buddhism  must  reject.  And  to  negate  progress  on  principle 
is  to  relinquish  the  hope  of  specifically  moral  Ufe. 

In  the  second  place — and  here  we  touch  bed-rock — the 
substantial  framework  of  Buddhism  is  pantheistic  monism, 
of  a  kind  that  discredits  personahty  as  but  '  a  momentary 
wave  upon  the  ocean  of  eternal  oneness.'  I  grant  without 
reserve  that  no  constraining  or  logically  irrefutable  argu- 
ments can  be  led  for  the  ultimate  truth  of  personahty 
in  Grod  or  man.  We  have  to  choose,  with  an  intensely 
moral  choice.  No  species  of  deduction  from  premises 
acknowledged  on  both  sides  of  the  debate  can  absolve 
us  from  the  necessity  of  deciding  for  ourselves.  We  are 
doubtless  entitled  to  argue  that  the  main  current  of  man's 
reUgious  experience  has  been  moving  in  the  direction  of 
personahsm,  the  conception  of  God  becoming  ever  more 
ethical  and  spiritual ;  yet  this  position  itself  is  an  in- 
demonstrable conviction  or  judgment  of  value.  Let  a 
man  prefer  pantheism,  and  Buddhism  may  have  his  vote  ; 
if  at  bottom  he  is  a  personahst,  he  cannot  but  claim  the 
higher  rank  for  Christianity. 

(3)  It  has  been  contended  in  modem  times  that  the 
absolute  rehgion  is  still  to  come.  In  the  voluminous 
and  rewarding  books  of  Troeltsch,  as  every  reader  knows, 
passages  may  be  found  in  which  he  seems  for  a  moment 
to  play  with  the  idea  of  a  new  rehgion  yet  to  arise  in  which 


174     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

the  Christian  sonship  may  be  supplanted  by  a  still  richer 
and  profounder  relation,  of  which  we  naturally  cannot 
so  far  form  a  clear  conception  ;  *  and  to  this  nobler  hypo- 
thetical faith  Christianity  is  conceived  as  standing  more 
or  less  as  Judaism  did  to  the  Christian  Gospel.  There 
might  come,  he  suggests,  such  a  disclosure  of  the  inner- 
most nature  of  being  as  to  render  us  dissatisfied  with 
Christianity.  Ethical  demands  might  be  made  upon  us 
which  as  Christians  we  could  not  meet.  He  attempts 
indeed  to  calm  the  misgivings  which  this  prediction,  if 
believed,  might  not  unintelUgibly  provoke  by  the  reminder 
that  all  the  best  things  in  Christianity  would  be  preserved 
in  any  better  worship  destined  to  replace  it.  But  obviously 
no  one  can  be  sure  whether  they  would  in  point  of  fact 
be  preserved,  until  we  have  laid  before  us  more  definite 
information  regarding  the  nature  of  this  imagined  future 
faith.  If  it  were,  say,  an  amalgam  of  Christianity  and 
Buddhism,  as  Pfleiderer  used  to  hint,  we  should  have  to 
surrender  at  least  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  the  forgiveness 
of  sins,  and  the  hope  of  a  blessed  Hfe  to  come. 

In  any  case,  to  invite  Christians  to  hold  their  beUef 
in  the  absoluteness  of  Christianity  with  a  loose  hand  on 
the  merely  logical  chance  that  something  better  may  turn 
up,  nobody  can  tell  what  or  when,  rather  recalls  the 
eighteenth -century  projector  who  announced  a  Company 
'  for  an  undertaking  which  shall  in  due  time  be  revealed,' 
each  subscriber  to  pay  at  once  two  guineas,  and  afterwards 
to  receive  a  share  of  a  hundred,  with  a  disclosure  of  the 
object. 2  But  instead  of  deaUng  now  with  Troeltsch's 
somewhat  intangible  hypothesis,  I  shall  hope  to  treat 
of  it  by  imphcation  when  discussing  the  finafity  of  our 
religion  on  its  own  merits.  In  advancing  to  this  question 
we  may  take  courage  from  the  reflection  that  no  other 
ancient  historical  religion  except  Christianity  has  so  far 

*  CL  Die  Ahsolutheit  des  ChrieterUuma  (2*«  Auflage,  1912):  'We  cannot 
really  exclude  the  possibility  that  a  higher  revelation  might  uncover  yet 
deeper  postulates  '  (p.  90). 

»  See  Lecky,  History  oj  Efvgland  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  vol.  ii.  p.  156 


n.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  175 

proved  able  to  hold  its  own  in  the  presence  of  modem 
thought. 

If  we  inspect  the  apparently  simple  proposition, 
*  Christianity  is  absolute,'  we  find,  as  perhaps  we  should 
expect,  that  both  terms  '  Christianity '  and  '  absolute ' 
are  equivocal.  It  will  be  agreed  that  a  statement  in  which 
subject  and  predicate  are  equally  ambiguous  stands 
much  in  need  of  scrutiny.  To  take  the  predicate  first : 
we  speak  of  Grod  properly  as  absolute,  as  the  absolute 
personaHty  ;  and  Christianity,  it  is  clear,  can  scarcely 
lay  claim  to  the  epithet  in  the  precise  sense  in  which 
it  belongs  to  God,  otherwise  we  should  be  in  the  untenable 
position  of  afl&rming  two  absolute  entities  in  a  single 
universe.  God  is  transcendent  and  somehow  above  the 
sphere  of  temporal  change  ;  Christianity  is  a  historical 
phenomenon.  No  doubt  HegeUanism  spoke  of  Christianity, 
interpreted  by  dialectic,  as  absolute  in  the  luiconditioned 
Divine  sense — at  least  it  did  so  at  intervals,  with  no  great 
consistency ;  but  this  was  because  Hegel  construed 
Christianity  on  evolutionary  fines  as  the  net  result  of  a 
process  which  the  Absolute  must  traverse  in  order  to 
reafise  its  own  being.  Christianity  on  this  reading  is 
absolute  for  the  reason  that  God's  own  absoluteness  could 
not  embrace  the  whole  world  of  finitude,  resolving  it  in 
Himself,  unless  His  self-consciousness  had  reached  full 
being  through,  inter  alia,  the  Christian  movement.  That 
movement  is  essential  to  God's  being  fuUy  God,  it  mediates 
His  complete  reahty.  The  question  may  legitimately 
be  raised  whether  these  ideas  are  truly  theistic,  let  alone 
Christian  ;  at  all  events  it  is  not  the  meaning  of  '  absolute  ' 
I  am  now  contending  for. 

Nor  does  that  term  denote  some  merely  formal  or  ex- 
ternal characteristic,  as  when  we  say  that  Christianity 
is  supematurally  revealed,  or  has  a  miraculous  origin,  or 
is  universally  normative,  or  even  that  it  claims  to  be  final. 
All  these  statements,  it  is  possible,  have  a  perfectly  good 


176     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect, 

sense ;  but  we  must  not  forget  that  the  same  claims  are 
emphatically  made  by  Judaism,  Buddhism,  and  Zoroastri- 
anism.  It  is  doubtful  whether  a  Uving  religion  could  be 
found  which  did  not  assert  its  own  absoluteness,  or  which 
would  not  slowly  perish  if  the  assertion  were  given  up. 
Each  real  faith  must  regard  itself  as  true,  supernatural, 
revealed.  Hence  the  Christian  religion,  when  fully  self- 
conscious,  must  do  something  more  than  point  to  inspired 
books  or  divinely  attested  prophets.  Its  absoluteness 
must  Ue  in  its  own  vital  content,  in  the  actual  significance 
of  the  Gospel ;  and  this  really  means  that  any  faith  which 
challenges  the  fijiaHty  of  Christianity  must  produce  the 
equivalent  of  Jesus  Christ.  He,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
embodies  the  Gospel  in  Himself,  and  in  Him  its  own 
finality,  if  real,  must  be  found.  To  call  Christianity 
the  absolute  or  fijial  rehgion,  therefore,  is  to  contend  not 
merely  that  in  Jesus  Christ  God  is  presented  in  a  form 
higher  and  more  spiritually  satisfying  than  elsewhere, 
but  that  the  relationship  to  the  Father  on  which  believers 
thus  enter  is  such  that  it  cannot  be  transcended.  Absolute- 
ness, that  is,  is  definable  apart  from  its  conditions  by 
reference  simply  to  the  meaning  of  the  Gospel.  The 
evidence  of  the  finahty  of  the  Christian  message  coincides 
with  the  evidence  of  its  truth,  and  Hes  in  a  disclosure  of 
truth  concerning  God  which  thenceforward  verifies  itself 
in  experience. 

Returning  to  the  proposition  '  Christianity  is  absolute,' 
let  us  note  this  time  the  ambiguity  of  the  subject. 
'  Christianity '  has  two  chief  meanings.  First,  it  means 
the  presentation  of  Divine  love,  pardon  and  fellowship 
given  in  and  through  the  personal  experience  of  Jesus. 
Here  it  stands  for  a  transcendent  gift — call  it  revelation 
or  reconcihation  or  what  you  will ;  at  all  events,  it  is  that 
in  Jesus  to  which  faith  responds  and  in  which  it  finds  God. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  constantly  means  not  the  Divine 
gift  but  the  human  reaction,  the  Christian  life  as  exhibited 
by  men.  In  this  sense  we  speak  f  amiUarly  of  the  Christianity 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTUNITT  177 

of  the  apostolic  age,  mediaeval  Christianity,  the  Christianity 
of  the  future .  Orthodox  and  unorthodox  freely  use  the  term 
in  this  sense.  And  not  seldom,  in  debating  the  absolute- 
ness of  Christianity,  we  get  hopelessly  to  cross -purposes 
owing  to  this  dupUcity  of  meaning. 

For  clearly,  in  the  second  sense  just  described, 
Christianity  as  a  form  of  human  faith  and  hfe  can  never 
attain  final  expression .  Here  the  absolute  rehgion  traverses 
history  ;  its  very  essence,  that  in  it  which  makes  it  absolute, 
not  merely  tolerates  but  demands  and  produces  an  evolu- 
tion. The  initial  impulse,  charged  with  infinite  freedom 
of  movement,  is  capable  of  boundless  change  and  must 
undergo  an  ever-renewed  adaptation  if  it  is  not  to  perish. 
In  this  sense  there  has  never  been  a  perfect  form  of 
Christianity.  St.  Paul  confessed  that  he  had  not  attained, 
and  Christianity  did  not  cease  to  be  modified  and  de- 
veloped when  the  apostles  passed  away.  Perfect  faith, 
love,  and  obedience  are  reserved  for  a  Hfe  beyond  space 
and  time.  K  absolute  means  '  complete,'  the  New  Testa- 
ment itself  discards  the  notion  of  an  absolute  Christianity 
as  a  possible  phenomenon  within  the  present  order,  and 
carries  on  the  prophetic  mind  to  the  far-off  day  when  the 
Church  shall  be  made  perfect  in  heavenly  places.  In  this 
aspect  it  has  been  aptly  said  that  the  finahty  of  our  rehgion 
really  consists  in  its  endless  capacity  of  growth  and  self- 
renewal.  The  differentia  of  Christianity  is  to  be  at  once 
final  and  interminably  progressive.  It  does  not  educate 
men  beyond  itself,  but  it  unceasingly  educates  them  in 
itself.  Here  as  always  growth  is  no  accident  or  difficulty, 
but  the  natural  sign  of  life. 

Various  objections  to  the  absolute  character  of  Chris- 
tianity, it  appears,  are  really  due  to  a  failure  to  make  clear 
this  distinction  between  the  Gospel  as  a  Divine  self-pre- 
sentation and  the  responsive,  specifically  Christian  form 
of  belief  and  conduct.  In  the  latter  signification  of  Chris- 
tianity the  claim  to  absoluteness  ought  not  to  be  raised ; 
we  may  go  further  and  contend  that  if  a  mere  fragment 


178     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbot. 

of  the  long  corporate  experience  of  humanity  had  ex- 
hausted the  power  of  Christ,  the  fact  would  itself  be  an 
unanswerable  refutation  of  His  finaUty. 

But  now,  recurring  to  the  first  meaning  of  the  word 
*  Christianity,'  I  should  argue  that  the  Divine  gift  offered 
in  Christ  is  complete  and  perfect,  and  that  this  forms  an 
ultimate  conviction  of  the  Christian  mind.  Through  the 
Gospel  we  become  possessors  of  a  rehgious  boon  than 
which  nothing  better  or  higher  can  be  thought  of.  It 
is  just  because  the  innermost  meaning  of  Christ  is  un- 
surpassable that  He  is  able  to  reveal  Himself  afresh  to 
ever  new  generations.  The  personal  presence  of  God 
in  Jesus  for  our  redemption  is  something  that  admits  of 
no  increase  of  value,  nor  can  we  think  of  anything  more 
significant  than  Jesus'  fife  and  death  as  the  cost  of  forgive- 
ness to  the  Father  How  could  there  be  a  qualitatively 
higher  relationship  to  Gk)d  than  the  sonship  into  which 
Jesus  leads  ?  And  how  could  we  be  assured  of  this  re- 
lationship, without  diminution  of  intimacy  or  moral 
authority,  except  through  One  who  is  not  merely  a  symbol 
of  Divine  love  but  God's  presence  in  this  real  world  ?  In 
short,  we  cannot  think  Christ  away  and  yet  have  the  same 
God  that  we  have  in  Him.  When  once  we  have  under- 
stood what  is  meant  by  calling  Jesus  the  Mediator  we 
know,  without  reasoning,  that  He  can  have  neither  rival 
nor  successor,  and  that  a  plurality  of  such  wholly 
transparent  media  of  the  Divine  mind  toward  the  sinful 
is  intrinsically  as  inconceivable  as  a  pluraHty  of  Gods. 
Every  attempt  to  elaborate  in  thought  a  higher  kind  of 
revelation  than  the  Christian  or  a  better  attitude  to  God 
than  that  of  sonship  in  Jesus  eventually  reaches  a  point 
at  which  it  abrogates  the  specific  character  of  rehgion  as  a 
form  of  human  experience,  and  renders  it  indistinguish- 
able from  nature-mysticism  or  morality.  Certainly  to 
interpret  Christ  better  is  possible,  to  grasp  the  object  of 
faith  with  a  surer  hand  and  apply  its  principles  more 
eflEectively  to  the  rebuilding  of  society  on  the  foundation 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  179 

of  God's  will  is  an  infinitely  urgent  necessity  ;  but  this  is 
not  merely  compatible  with  but  derives  from  the  certainty 
that  the  Christian  revelation  is  ultimate,  in  the  sense 
that  it  cannot  be  superseded.^  The  watchword  of  the 
Reformation,  '  by  faith  alone,'  is  but  a  variant  of  this 
conviction,  and  perhaps  the  most  unchristian  thing  in 
Romanism  is  that  beside  the  rehgious  absoluteness  of 
Jesus  Christ  it  has  dared  to  set  the  absoluteness  of  the 
Papal  Church. 

The  consciousness  of  this  final  character  was  from  the 
first  native  to  the  new  rehgion.  Every  page  of  the  New 
Testament  is  here  on  our  side.  Jesus  calls  all  the  weary 
to  Himself  and  leads  them  to  the  Father — not  to  some 
point  at  which  the  prospect  opens  of  a  future  possession 
of  God,  but  to  His  very  presence.  In  His  own  eyes  He 
is  the  Bringer  of  perfect  fellowship  with  the  Father,  the 
Kingdom  of  God  up  to  its  transcendent  fulfilment  is 
indissolubly  Hnked  with  Him,  and  the  Divine  purpose 
reaches  its  goal  in  a  gift  that  is  infinite,  victorious, 
eternal.  '  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and 
he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to  reveal  Him.'  ^  The 
apostles  went  out  to  preach  redemption  exclusively  through 
Christ,  and  one  mode  in  which  the  finaUty  of  the  message 
certified  itself  was  that  He  proved  adequate  for  all.  In 
their  teaching  we  can  read  the  certainty  that  now  at  last, 
in  the  Christian  society,  the  long-hidden  mystery  of  Grod 
was  unveiled,  antiquating  once  for  all  every  distinction 

*  People  often  disparage  this  as  merely  theological  '  old-fogyism,'  as 
if  all  that  mattered  were  that  in  the  Christian  experience  we  should  be 
conscious  of  moving  in  the  right  direction.  Troeltsch  himself  occasionally 
shows  a  tendency  to  put  things  this  way,  as  when  he  says  that  *  absolute- 
ness '  in  the  proper  sense  means  simply  that  Christianity  is  the  highest 
known  religion,  and  implies  '  the  certainty  that  we  have  entered  on  the 
path  to  the  perfect  truth  '  {Absolutheit,  p.  92).  But  this  is  a  misinter- 
pretation of  faith.  The  quality  of  faith  alters  for  the  worse  if  the  idea 
be  admitted  that  so  far  we  are  only  heading  in  the  right  direction,  but 
have  not  yet  attained.  That  is  to  txu-n  Christianity  again  into  a  religion 
of  hope,  like  Judaism,  and  obscure  its  native  sens©  of  real  possession.  Cf. 
St.  Paul's  words  :  '  Through  Him  we  have  had  (and  liave)  our  access  into 
this  grace  wherein  w©  stand  *  (Rom.  v.  2). 

*  Mfttft.  xi.  27. 


180     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lec?ii 

of  sex  or  rank  or  nation  or  civilisation  or  religious  faith. 
In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  the  Church  is  pictured 
as  the  mystical  fellowship  representing  the  final  unity 
of  all  things,  and  it  is  assumed  that  '  men  can  thus  unite 
in  the  truth  of  Christ  because  it  is  the  absolute  truth, 
which  Ues  at  the  very  heart  of  things.'  ^  In  Hebrews 
over  against  the  shadows  of  the  Law  is  placed  the  supreme 
reality  disclosed  in  Jesus,  beyond  which  there  can  be  no 
advance.  Thus  alone  can  men  find  immediate,  unre- 
stricted access  to  God,  for  Christ's  achievement  is  of  lasting 
and  all-sufficient  vafidity.  In  the  Fourth  Grospel,  and 
still  more  decisively  in  the  First  Epistle  of  John,  it  is 
declared  by  obvious  impHcation  that  Christianity  is  the 
final  religion,  the  absolute  standard  of  faith  and  fife, 
because  it  stands  alone  in  proclaiming  without  reserve  that 
God  is  love  and  life,  and  that  this  life  is  in  His  Son.  New 
Testament  eschatology,  with  its  expectation  of  an  im- 
mediate End,  is  also  a  transient  expression  of  faith  in  the 
absoluteness  of  the  revelation  contained  in  the  Gospel, 
the  uniqueness  of  Jesus,  the  infinitude  of  redemption. 
So,  too,  when  the  Church  Fathers  argued  that  Greek 
philosophers  had  borrowed  from  the  Bible,  they  were 
offering  a  confused  witness  to  the  same  behef.  This 
conviction  of  having  in  Jesus  the  one  thing  needful  has 
gone  with  the  Church  through  history,  rising  always  into 
keener  urgency  when  the  fires  of  missionary  zeal  begin 
afresh  to  bum  and  shine.  If  the  past  can  prove  anything, 
it  does  prove  that  assurance  of  its  own  finaUty  is  a  part 
of  Christian  faith.  The  point  is  one  on  which  the  befieving 
consciousness  has  never  been  able  to  bear  the  least  am- 
biguity. No  other  rehgion  lays  such  stress  on  the  claim 
to  be  the  reUgion  of  humanity  ;  none,  accordingly,  has  in 
the  same  fashion  made  missionary  activity  a  principle 
of  its  fife. 

The  two  most  important  discussions  of  our  problem 

^  Seott,  T^M  Apologetic  of  the  New  Tettamtnt,  p.  191. 


Ti.]  THE  ABSOLOTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  181 

in  modem  times  are  probably  those  of  Schleiermacher 
and,  a  hundred  years  later,  Troeltsch.  In  his  famous 
fifth  '  Address,'  Schleiermacher  raised  the  question  of  the 
absoluteness  of  Christianity,  answering  it  cautiously  for 
the  moment,  but  speaking  more  confidently  as  time  went 
on.  Troeltsch  has,  if  anything,  moved  in  the  opposite 
direction.  His  expressions  have  grown  more  reserved. 
He  rejects  with  great  emphasis  the  Ritschlian  statement 
of  the  case  for  finahty,  on  the  ground  that  Ritschhans 
have  never  really  faced  the  problems  and  demands  of  the 
historic  method.  They  tend,  he  complains,  to  take  some 
Biblical  segment  of  the  past,  such  as  the  personality  of 
Jesus,  and  make  it  a  holy  island  in  the  sea  of  change — 
to  represent  it,  that  is  to  say,  as  fenced  off  inviolably 
from  profane  history,  and  thus  to  '  absolutise '  its  origins 
in  the  sense  of  withdrawing  them  from  the  action  of  ordinary 
secular  forces.  He  speaks  indeed  of  the  Ritschlian  argu- 
ment as  a  whole  with  a  contempt  which  the  varied  ob- 
scurities and  imperfections  of  his  own  powerful  exposition 
hardly  justify,  dismissing  it  cavalierly  as  a  thing  of  shreds 
and  patches,  of  haU-tones  and  makeshifts. 

He  then  proceeds  to  argue  that  Christianity,  considered 
in  the  light  of  the  philosophy  of  history,  must  be  ranked 
simply  as  the  highest  religion  'up  to  date.'  More  we 
cannot  say.  The  world  is  ever  moving  on  to  new,  un- 
guessed  combinations  of  faith  and  love.  It  is  axiomatic 
that  history  cannot  contain  either  an  absolute  religion  or 
an  absolute  personality.  That  which  is  absolute  is  always 
something  transcendent,  which  must  be  conceived  of  as 
either  the  source  of  the  entire  cosmic  movement  or  its 
goal ;  but  whatever  enters  the  field  of  time  is  thereby  re- 
vealed as  temporary,  contingent,  relative .  It  acts  and  reacts 
with  its  environment,  filling  an  appointed  place  within  the 
ceaselessly  moving  stream  of  change.  Primitive  Chris- 
tianity is  indissolubly  bound  up  with  the  eschatological 
hope,  and  the  Christianity  of  the  early  Catholic  Church 
with  contemporary   philosophic   thought.      Nor  can   we 


/ 


182     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

use  the  tempting  distinction  of  husk  and  kernel ;  to  think 
of  an  absolute  ideal  realised  in  historical  form  is  as  much 
as  to  think  of  a  red-hot  ball  in  a  waxen  casing.  As  Strauss 
puts  it :  '  The  Idea  loves  not  to  pour  all  its  fulness  in  a 
single  instance.' 

Nevertheless,  when  all  is  said,  he  cordially  admits  that 
Christianity  is  the  best  reHgion  in  the  worid  of  the  dis- 
tinctively personalis  tic  type  and  forms  a  point  of  con- 
vergence for  all  previous  lines  of  the  highest  reUgious 
development,  not  merely  combining  in  itself  the  highest 
things  in  the  past  but  opening  a  new  era  of  advance.  But, 
as  he  again  reminds  us,  all  this  furnishes  no  guarantee  of 
its  finality.  We  cannot  prescribe  to  the  future.  No 
scientific  demonstration  could  possibly  be  given  that 
Christianity  is  the  end  of  God's  ways  with  men,  and  that 
some  day  it  may  not  be  outstripped  by  a  better  revelation, 
a  richer  faith  which  first  creates  and  then  satisfies  needs 
of  which  as  yet  we  can  form  no  conception  but  which, 
once  felt,  will  be  recognised  as  self-evidencing.  Who  can 
be  sure  that  the  civilisation  of  Europe  and  America  will 
last  for  ever  ?  How  can  we  tell  whether  the  bonds 
uniting  our  religious  life  to  Jesus  may  not  in  time  be 
snapped  ?  Nothing  is  reaUy  absolute  but  Grod  and  His 
Kingdom.  The  notion  that  what  is  absolute  could  be 
localised  in  history,  or  apprehended  by  minds  which 
history  itself  has  fashioned,  is,  however  venial,  a  complete 
illusion.  The  methodological  principles  of  criticism,  ana- 
logy, and  correlativity,  which  historical  research  has  no 
option  but  to  use,  forbid  the  thought. 

Troeltsch  has  been  widely  censured  for  this  general 
argumentation,  which  no  doubt  is  not  in  all  points 
satisfactory ;  but  there  is  at  least  one  element  of  his 
view  which  we  need  have  no  scruple  in  adopting.  He  is 
surely  right,  though  of  course  not  at  all  singular,  in  urging 
that  the  claim  of  our  religion  to  finality  can  never  be 
established  by  any  technical  historical  investigation, 
just     because    everjrthiug     amenable    to    treatment    by 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  183 

scientific  history  is  thereby  qualified  as  individual  and 
relative.  In  other  words,  pure  history  is  bound  to  leave 
the  door  open  for  the  possible  advent  of  a  higher  faith. 
The  scientific  disciphne  of  evaluation,  caU  it  history  or 
philosophy,  can  do  no  more  than  pronounce  Christianity 
the  highest  point  so  far  attained.  Criticism,  dealing 
with  past  events,  of  necessity  reduces  certitude  to  the 
level  of  a  more  or  less  high  probabiHty  ;  the  law  of  analogy 
excludes  the  possibihty  that  the  past  anywhere  can  show 
a  genuinely  unique  factor  ;  the  principle  of  correlativity 
must  explain  all  things  by  the  immanent  causal  nexus 
of  the  world,  a  nexus  untouched  by  the  action  of  super- 
natural forces.  Hence  we  need  not  look  to  scientific 
historical  research  for  a  constraining  proof  that  Christianity 
is  final.  Thus  far,  we  may  assume,  every  one  must  go 
along  with  Troeltsch  who  understands  what  modem 
scientific  method  is. 

But  two  important  considerations  must  be  borne  in 
mind.  First  of  all,  the  science  of  history  in  question  is  a 
special  science,  whidh  means  that,  Hke  all  special  sciences, 
it  operates  with  concepts  whose  value  and  scope  is  purely 
relative.  These  concepts  may  be,  and  are,  quite  imfit 
to  express  the  nature  of  spiritual  experience  as  a  whole. 
The  account  they  give  is  not  exhaustive.  Each  science, 
the  experts  agree,  must  have  its  range  deUmited  by  certain 
initial  assumptions  ;  further — and  this  is  what  matters — 
anything  not  falling  under  these  assumptions  must  be 
treated  by  the  science  in  view  as  non-existent.  Clearly, 
then,  no  method  in  the  worid  can  decide  upon  facts.  The 
scientific  historian  certainly  has  a  right  to  say :  I  cannot, 
qtui  historian,  take  cognisance  of  an  alleged  final  revelation 
of  God  in  Christ,  for  in  my  work  I  am  necessarily  guided 
by  what  are  purely  relative  principles.  But  he  has  no 
right  to  add  :  Therefore  no  such  final  revelation  can  have 
happened.  Just  as  the  physicist  is  bound  to  apply  the 
principles  of  his  science  so  as  to  leave  room  for  morafity 
and  freedom,  so  the  historian  is  bound  to  apply  his  specific 


184     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lbctt. 

principles  in  a  form  that  does  not  peremptorily  exclude 
the  possibility  of  a  unique  influence  of  Jesus.  Suppose 
the  historian  to  be  a  convinced  Christian,  what  then  ? 
Is  he  incapable  of  really  scientific  work  ?  He  has  found 
Gk)d  in  Christ  in  an  ultimate  and  complete  revelation : 
does  he  thereby  forfeit  the  intellectual  respect  of  his 
colleagues  ?  Or  is  not  the  fact  rather  that  he  has  dis- 
covered a  cardinal  truth  at  which  others  may  arrive  by 
other  paths,  viz.  that  on  many  subjects  scientific  history 
cannot  speak  the  last  word  ?  It  cannot  even  explain  St. 
Paul  or  Luther  ;  what  wonder  if  it  fail  to  cope  with  the 
incomparable  fact  of  Jesus  ?  To  repeat  it  once  more : 
heuristic  methods  cannot  settle  what  is  or  what  is  not 
possible,  for  by  definition  these  methods  are  careful  gener- 
alisations formed  by  study  of  the  normal  case. 

Secondly,  we  have  to  ask  why  Christianity  should  be 
singled  out  for  this  objection  that  it  cannot  be  of  absolute 
value  just  because  it  is  entangled  in  history.  Is  not 
morality  in  the  same  case  ?  The  irreducible  distinction 
between  persons  and  things  is  now  an  accepted  principle 
of  the  higher  ethics,  but  it  was  not  always  so.  It  is  a 
conviction  which  emerged  in  historical  ways  and  through 
historical  media.  But  if  men  became  aware  of  the  un- 
conditional value  of  ethical  personality  through  past 
experiences,  while  yet  the  historical  origins  of  any  such 
intuition  leave  its  absolute  character  unaffected,  and  we 
decline  to  '  relativise '  it  merely  because  its  content  has 
had  a  history,  Christian  faith  may  surely  claim  equality 
of  treatment.  Here  is  an  absolute  morality  which  has 
come  to  light  through  the  processes  of  the  human  past ; 
may  not  an  absolute  religion  also  rise  to  view  ?  May  it 
not  be  that  in  neither  case  we  can  really  think  the  absolute- 
ness away  except  by  abstracting  from  the  vital  conditions 
of  our  existence  ? 

Again,  it  is  too  often  forgotten  that  the  finality  of  the 
Christian  religion  is  of  interest  solely  to  theists.  No  one 
else  would  deem  it  worth  discussion.     But  is  not  theism 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITT  185 

also  the  fruit  of  history  ?  It  has  arisen  in  time.  If 
evolution  demands  a  higher  than  Christianity,  a  higher 
than  theism  is  not  less  necessary.  As  Mr.  Whitaker 
has  expressed  it,  *  To  take  "  God  "  as  a  fixed,  ascertained, 
once-for-all-settled  idea,  while  you  take  Christianity  as  a 
passing  phase  or  embodiment  of  that  idea,  is  quite  illogical.' 
After  all,  we  could  assign  no  value  or  relevance  to  a  theism 
which  was  devoid  of  Hving  connection  with  human  Ufe 
in  its  past  unfolding.  To  cut  the  bonds  linking  the  theistic 
faith  to  the  events  and  experiences  of  human  Hfe  would 
be  to  relapse  hopelessly  upon  the  so-called  ideas  of  pure 
reason,  about  which  no  two  thinkers  have  ever  agreed 
for  half  an  hour  together.  Notoriously  there  exists  no 
such  thing  as  '  pure  reason  '  in  that  vacuous  and  beggarly 
sense.  Reason  has  become  what  it  is  through  historical 
changes,  through  the  influence  of  personaUties  upon  each 
other  ;  and  to  hold  that  the  specific  influence  of  Jesus 
has  had  the  effect  of  giving  responsive  minds  a  perfectly 
satisfying  and  eternally  valid  apprehension  of  God  is  nothing 
more  than  the  supreme  instance  of  a  principle  operative 
everywhere.  *  The  aversion  to  history  and  historical 
considerations  as  a  source  of  our  beHef,'  says  the  writer 
I  have  just  quoted,  '  is  a  piece  of  intellectual  cowardice  : 
it  is  one  method  of  running  away  from  the  world  in  which 
God  has  placed  us  and  the  task  he  has  given  us.  For  we 
are  placed  in  a  world  of  human,  historical  conditions.  It 
is  part  of  our  fife's  business  to  construe  that  world  of  history. 
What  we  think  of  it  does  most  materially  affect  all  our 
beliefs  and  shape  our  thought  about  God,  about  morals, 
about  the  nature  of  the  soul  and  about  human  destiny.  .  .  . 
There  is  an  inherent  fallacy  in  the  notion  that  you  must 
use  your  God-given  reason  in  thinking  about  thought, 
but  you  must  not  trust  it  to  think  about  the  historical 
nianifestations  which  alone  make  thought  important  and 
vital  to  our  own  interests.  It  is  true  that  a  befiever  is  at 
the  mercy  of  any  one  who  can  prove  to  him  that  his  history 
is  all  wrong.    But  a  simple  Theist  is  also  at  tho  meroy 


186     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  [lect. 

of  any  one  who  can  prove  to  him  that  his  reasoning  about 
Crod  is  all  wrong.  .  .  .  We  have  to  use  both  our  reasoning 
intellect  and  historical  knowledge.  That  this  is  so  may 
be  proved  in  one  sentence,  thus :  A  man's  religious 
outlook  upon  moral  and  religious  possibilities  is  vastly 
altered  according  as  he  believes  or  does  not  believe  that 
Jesus  Uved  in  perfect  holiness  with  God.  Take  either 
side  upon  this  historical  question,  and  your  view  of  the 
range  of  possible  human  achievement,  and  many  other 
things,  is  at  once  decisively  affected.'  ^  In  short,  we  have 
no  option  but  to  face  the  adventurous  duty  of  relating 
our  faith  positively  to  history,  and  the  attempt  to  shirk 
it  leads  inevitably  to  the  impoverishment  and  atrophy  of 
our  noblest  powers. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  spend  time  in  the  inquiry  whether 
Evolution  as  such  is  hostile  to  finality.  Evolution  as  a 
theory  is  not  hostile  to  anything,  but  only  a  description 
of  what  happens.  Nor,  again,  is  Evolution  itself  mere 
random  change  :  rather  it  moves  on  definite  lines,  and  in 
a  multitude  of  cases  proceeds,  after  a  certain  point,  to 
perfect  and  develop  some  new  form .  It  is  doubtful  whether 
any  one  expects  the  horse  to  change  hereafter  through 
evolution  into  something  that  is  not  a  horse  but  higher, 
or  man  to  give  place  to  superman.  Similarly,  as  the 
development  of  man  now  consists  in  his  being  more  of  a 
man,  so  the  development  of  Christianity  will  consist  in 
its  becoming  its  characteristic  self  more  and  more  fully, 
expressing  its  nature  with  an  ever-increased  complete- 
ness. It  will  be  applied  in  ever  new  directions,  but  it  will 
not  change  its  nature  or  begin  to  draw  upon  a  radically 
different  source  of  inspiration.  We  need  no  more  expect 
the  future  to  provide  a  better  reHgion,  simply  on  the 
ground  that  Evolution  must  go  on,  and  ever  new  types  of 
religious  experience  must  be  inaugurated,  than  we  expect 
new  kinds  of  morality  to  be  produced  indefinitely.  The 
ideas  of  *  right '  and  *  good '  have  come  to  stay,  because 

*  Tht  Finaiity  ef  tht  Chrittian  Bthgion,  pp.  7-10. 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  187 

once  we  have  understood  their  meaning  we  see  they  cannot 
be  improved  on.  In  no  other  sense,  but  undoubtedly  in 
this  sense,  we  are  entitled  to  say  that  Jesus'  presentation 
of  the  Father  and  His  consequent  bestowal  of  the  fihal 
spirit  on  men  has  ultimate  and  eternal  value.  By 
affirming  the  '  absoluteness  '  of  Christianity  we  mean  that 
in  dealing  with  Jesus  we  are  dealing  with  God  Himself  ; 
there  was  in  Him  a  Divine  redemptive  Hfe  transcending 
the  Hmits  of  His  own  and  every  later  time. 

Scientific  history,  as  we  have  seen,  is  unequal  to  the 
task  of  recognising  an  absolute  personaHty.  But  then 
(and  this  is  the  really  important  thing)  no  man  is  a  mere 
historian,  even  if  he  tries  to  be.  For  no  man  is  without 
a  conscience — the  sense  of  unconditional  and  infalfible 
obligation  ;  hence  none  of  us  can  be  guaranteed  against 
the  risk  of  finding  ourselves  in  the  presence  of  One  who 
deals  with  us  in  ways  which  we  know  to  be  God's  ways. 
It  may  happen  to  any  man,  at  any  time,  given  the  witness 
of  a  Uving  Church,  to  be  inescapably  confronted  with 
a  Person  who  convicts  him  of  moral  ruin  yet  offers  him  the 
saving  love  of  Grod.  And  if  this  should  happen,  he  will 
then  know,  with  a  certainty  which  no  history  can  give 
or  take  away,  that  in  this  Jesus  he  has  touched  and  met 
with  God. 

Assuming,  then,  that  scientific  history  cannot  give  us 
all  we  want,  while  yet  the  crucial  reahty  must  He  within 
the  sphere  of  historic  fact,  let  us  now  mark  the  cardinal 
truth  that  the  absoluteness  or  finahty  of  the  Christian 
rehgion  can  only  be  perceived  and  appreciated  in  faith. 
We  affirm  it  as  a  personal  conviction  quite  compatible 
with  the  impartial  study  of  other  faiths,  yet  at  bottom 
a  conviction  evoked  solely  by  contact  with  the  special 
values  present  in  Jesus.  The  trust  that  Christ  is  final 
can  no  more  than  the  trust  that  He  is  real  be  produced 
by  theoretical  and  constraining  argument ;  we  name 
Him  absolute  because  in  experience  we  recognise  Him 


v/ 


1$8     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lect. 

as  the  ultimate  Divine  answer  to  man's  individual  and 
social  needs.  There  is  one  sense  in  which  we  may  still 
claim  to  prove  this  absoluteness  ;  that  is,  we  can  show 
that  absoluteness  is  involved  in  the  meaning  of  the  Grospel. 
We  can  analyse  Christian  experience,  and  exhibit  the 
persuasion  that  Jesus  is  final  as  one  of  its  constitutive 
elements.  It  may  no  doubt  be  said  that  this  is  to  assume 
the  Christian  experience,  and  therefore  argue  in  a  circle  ; 
but  the  charge  is  one  which  strikes  equally  at  ethics,  which 
assumes  the  fact  of  ethical  life,  and  even  at  science,  which 
can  only  begin  its  work  by  assuming  the  experience  of 
nature.  In  all  three  cases  the  mind  is  dealing  with  the  given. 
Now  the  Christian  thinker  cannot  afford  to  surrender 
this  conviction  at  the  supposed  challenge  of  the  Com- 
parative Science  of  Religions,  merely  to  please  a  whim 
of  intellectualism.  To  abandon  the  finality  of  the  Gospel 
would  rob  faith  of  its  assurance  that  we  have  the  highest 
good  in  Christ  alone,  and  thus  reintroduce  that  old  fatal 
note  of  unceri:ainty  about  the  character  of  God  which  had 
crept  into  mediaeval  piety  and  was  overcome  only  by  the 
great  Reformation  message  of  free  Divine  grace.  To 
treat  the  ultimate  religious  worth  of  Jesus  as  an  open 
question,  by  reducing  Him  to  the  level  of  the  prophets, 
is  to  alter  the  characteristic  tone  of  Christian  piety  subtly 
but  radically.  Were  Jesus  no  more  than  He  has  often 
been  pictured  in  the  Hterature  of  Liberal  Protestantism, 
then  indeed  we  might  well  hope  that  He  would  be 
superseded,  since  in  that  case  we  could  quite  easily  imagine 
a  better  revelation  of  God.  We  could  imagine  a  revelation 
of  God  which  is  perfect  because  the  Revealer  t^  what  He 
reveals,  because  in  Him  God  is  personally  present,  re- 
deeming at  His  own  cost.  But  Jesus  has  been  called 
absolute  on  the  ground  that  precisely  this  is  what 
Qiristians  have  found  in  Him,  this  something  beyond 
which  faith  and  imagination  cannot  go  ;  whereas  in  other 
worships,  even  the  noblest,  a  shadow  still  hangs  over 
the  Father's  fa«e. 


VI.]  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY  189 

This,  be  it  noted,  is  not  an  argument  that  Christianity 
stands  to  all  other  religions  in  the  bare  ratio  of  full  posses- 
sion to  unsatisfied  desire.  On  the  contrary,  wherever  men 
have  sought,  there,  we  must  beheve,  they  have  in  part 
found.  The  Father  disclosed  in  Jesus  could  not  leave 
such  prayers  unheard.  Nevertheless,  both  desire  and 
possession  exist  in  varied  degrees  of  completeness,  and 
in  Christ  the  trust -evoking  reaUty  is  such  a  manifestation 
of  Grod  as  puts  all  spiritual  good  within  our  reach.  Not 
only  so  ;  but  every  excellence  in  another  reUgion  is  the 
signal  of,  and  the  challenge  to  discover,  a  deeper  worth  in 
Christianity.  It  is  significant  that  so  many  high-minded 
votaries  of  non-Christian  faiths  eventually  become  dis- 
satisfied, because  increasingly  conscious  of  needs  still 
craving  an  adequate  object,  as  well  as  of  spiritual  powers 
still  unexercised  ;  but  no  man  has  yet  been  found  to 
complain  that  he  had  exhausted  the  interest  of  Jesus, 
or  measured  Hjs  redemptive  powers. 

For  Christianity,  then,  the  problem  of  its  own  absolute- 
ness is  one  of  fife  and  death.  If  there  may  be  a  better  way 
to  Grod,  and  we  feel  this,  we  cannot  be  sure  the  Christian 
way  may  not  have  led  us  wrong.  If  a  future  Gospel  may 
bring  men  nearer  Grod,  are  we  then  at  all  in  touch  with 
Him  ?  Dilemmas  are  odious,  but  there  appears  to  be  no 
escape  from  this  one  :  Either  we  have  in  Christ  something 
less  than  complete  certainty  of  Grod,  which  means  the 
readjustment  of  aU  our  rehgious  estimates,  or  it  is 
actually  complete  certainty  that  we  do  have,  therefore 
Christianity  is  the  final  faith. 

This  is  often  repudiated  as  involving  a  cold  or  narrow- 
hearted  attitude  to  ethnic  faiths,  but  it  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  the  exact  reverse  is  the  truth.^    If  Christianity 

*  It  is  not  inconceivable,  indeed,  that  a  man  might  discover  for  tb« 
first  time  through  contact  with  pious  Mohammedans  or  Buddhists  tba 
real  meaning  and  claims  of  absolute  dependence  or  perfect  self -surrender, 
and  be  stirred  thereby  to  find  these  things  more  satisfyingly  in  Jeaua 
Christ.  Thia  might  h9  the  aotual  ordvr  of  •T«ot«  in  Hm  ttory  of  hit 
eonvenion. 


190     ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE   [lbct. 

is  the  world-religion,  its  function  is  to  satisfy  the  longings 
which  these  other  faiths  express,  and  to  lead  on  the  powers 
which  those  faiths  are  using  to  their  fuller  development 
and  loftier  employment.  The  cHmax  guarantees  the 
partial  truth  of  earlier  stages.  It  is  when  Christ  is  viewed 
as  the  full  answer  to  man's  prayer  for  Hfe  that  we  can 
appreciate  with  genuine  sjmapathy  all  older  forms  of  the 
same  prayer,  for  now  we  know  the  real  object  of  their 
yearnings  ;  and  the  pathos  of  those  ethnic  suppUcations, 
their  profound  beauty,  their  moral  daring,  their  inspired 
and  persistent  trust  make  their  right  impression.  The 
true  hght  is  now  shining,  and  by  its  gleam  we  can  mark 
the  upward  progress  of  man's  soul.  Hence,  the  place  to 
be  given  to  the  great  reHgious  teachers  of  the  world  must 
be  measured  from  that  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  value  of 
Judaism,  Parsism,  Buddhism  and  the  rest  is,  in  the  last 
resort,  the  value  vouched  for  and  coimtersigned  by  the 
Grospel.  '  If,'  it  has  been  well  said,  '  in  the  idea  of  Nirvana 
Buddha  was  attempting  to  state  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  eternal  life,  an  existence  to  be  attained  by  dying  to  self, 
then  it  is  a  doctrine  we  can  be  thankful  for.  But  if  it  is  to 
be  set  side  by  side  with  the  Christian  doctrine,  as  of  equal 
truth,  it  invites  an  unfair  comparison  and  becomes  the 
most  pessimistic  and  pernicious  idea  in  the  world.'  ^ 

Obedience,  after  all,  is  the  organ  of  spiritual  know- 
ledge ;  and  in  the  present  context  this  signifies  that  it  is 
only  through  the  perpetual  conflict  of  mission  enterprise 
that  the  Church  can  keep  its  great  assurance  that  Chris- 
tianity is  ultimate.  Were  it  to  despair  of  the  missionary 
cause ;  it  would  instantly  lose  that  life-giving  insight. 
We  can  appeal  to  the  best  missionaries  at  this  point.  They 
are  agreed  in  testifying  that  behef  in  the  finality  of  the 
Christian  Gospel  is  the  one  practicable  basis  of  their  special 
work.  Evangelisation  becomes  reasonable  and  effective 
only  through  the  faith  that  the  message  of  Jesus  supersedes 
the  past  by  fulfiUing  its   noblest  hopes  and  completing 

>  Orohard,  The  Necessity  of  Christ,  pp.  60-1. 


n,}  THE  ABSOLUTENESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  191 

its  best  achievements.  Evidence  comes  in  from  all  the 
fields  to  prove  the  vital  necessity  for  missionary  work  of 
the  truth  of  the  absoluteness  of  the  Christian  revelation. 
*  Everywhere,'  says  Professor  D.  S.  Cairns,  '  this  is  what 
arouses  opposition,  but  everywhere  it  is  what  wins  men. 
...  It  is  precisely  because  of  the  strength  of  their  con- 
viction as  to  the  absoluteness  of  Christianity  that  our 
correspondents  find  it  possible  to  take  the  more  generous 
view  of  the  non-Christian  rehgions.'  ^  The  conviction  is 
surely  one  which  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  put  aside 
on  academic  grounds,  as  though  the  proper  reserve  of 
the  scientific  historian  were  a  better  index  of  the  poten- 
tiahties  of  the  Divine  order  than  the  consenting  experience 
of  all  Christian  pioneers. 

Nothing  really  so  confirms  a  man's  antecedent  beUef  in 
the  finaUty  of  the  Christian  faith  as  the  great  venture  of 
going  out  with  it  in  Ms  hand  into  dark  continents,  to  face 
there  the  best  which  other  rehgions  have  accompUshed. 
Christianity,  in  short,  is  absolute  if  it  dares  to  be  so.  The 
persuasion  of  its  supremacy  is  not  something  that  can 
be  attained  once  and  for  all  either  by  the  Church  or  the 
individual  Christian,  entered  correctly  in  a  creed  or  private 
notebook,  and  left  thenceforward  to  maintain  itself  in  hfe 
and  power.  No  :  we  lose  the  truth  except  as  we  continually 
regain  it,  fighting  the  good  fight  of  faith  with  decisive 
and  fearless  trust.  The  great  certitude  that  Christ  is 
final  belongs  not  to  the  sensible  men,  but  to  the  martyrs — 
to  all  who  are  willing  to  spend  and  be  spent  to  the  utmost 
in  a  cause  greater  than  hfe  itself. 

*  StporU  ^  W«rld  Mis$iomary  Go^f§rme$  (1910),  Hp.  242,  269. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

(Selected  Works) 

I.  JUDAISM  AND  CHRISTIANITY 

Abrahams.     Studies  in  Pha/risaism  and  the  Gospels,  1917. 

Addis.     Hebrew  Religion  to  the  ^Jstablishrnent  of  Judaism  under 

Ezra,  1906. 
Baldensperger.     Das  spdtere  Judenthum  ah  Vorstufe  des  Christen- 

turns,  1900. 
BoussET.     Die  Religion  des  Judenthums,^  1906. 
BuDDE.     Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile  (Eng,  tr.),  1899. 
Charles.     Eschatology,  Hebrew,  Jewish,  and  Christian,^  1913. 
Fairweather.     Backgroimd  of  the  Gospels,  1908. 
Friedlander,  M.     Die  religiosen  Bewegungen  innerhalb  des  Juden- 

thums  im  Zeitalter  Jesu,  1905. 
HoLLMANN.     Welche  Religion  hatten  die  Juden  als  Jesus  auftrat  ? 

1905. 
HoLTZMANN,  0.     Die  jildische  Schriftgelehrsamkeit  zur  Zdt  Jesu 

1901. 
HoRT.     Judaistic  Christianity,  1894. 
LoiSY.     The  Religion  of  Israel  (Eng.  tr.),  1910. 
Montefiore.    The  Religion  of  the  Ancient  Hebrews,  1892. 
Peake.     The  Religion  of  Israel,  1908. 
Schechter.     Some  Aspects  of  Rabbinic  Theology,  1909. 
ScHURER.     The  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ  (Eng.  tr.). 

1890-96.     (The  4th  German  edition,  1901-11.) 
Toy.     Judaism  and  Christianity,  1890. 
Wheeler  Robinson.     The  Religious  Ideas  of  the  Old   Testament, 

1913.     Also  the  standard  works  on  Old  Testament  Theology,  by 

Bennett,  Stade  and  Bertholet,  Davidson,  Marti,  Piepenbring 

(Eng.  tr.),  Schultz  (Eng.  tr.),  Smend. 

II.  HELLENISM  AND  CHRISTIANITY 

Angus.     The  Environraent  of  Early  Christianity,  1914. 

Bonhoffer.     Epiktet  und  das  Neue  Testament,  1911. 

CuMONT.     Les  religions  orientales  dans  le  paganisme  romain,^  1909. 

Astrology  and  Religion  among  the  Greeks  and  Romans  (Eng. 

tr.),  1912. 


194      ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 

Decharmk.  La  critique  des  traditions  religieuses  chez  les  Greci^ 
1904. 

Dill.     Roman  Society  from  Nero  to  Marcus  AureliuSy  1904. 

Farnell.     Higher  Aspects  of  Greek  Religion,  1912. 

Friedlander,  L.     Hellenism  and  Christianity^  1912. 

Glover.     The  Conflict  of  Religions  in  the  Roman  Empire,  1907. 

Harnack.  The  Mission  and  Expansion  of  Christianity  (Eng.  tr.), 
1908. 

Hatch.     Hibbert  Lectures,  1890. 

J  AGO  BY.  Die  antiken  Mysterienreligionen  und  das  Christentum, 
1910. 

Kennedy.  St  Paul  and  the  Mystery -Religions,  1913  ;  Philo's  Con- 
tribution to  Religion,  1919. 

Lake.     The  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1911. 

NoRDEN.     Agnostos  Theos,  1913. 

Ramsay.     The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  1893. 

Reitzenstein.     Die  hellenistichen  Mysterienreligionen,  1910, 

RoHDE.     Psyche,^  1898. 

TouTAiN.     Les  cultes  paiens  dans  V empire  romain,  vol.  2. 

Wendland.     Die  hellenistische-rbmische  Kultur,'^*  1912, 

III.  GREEK  PHILOSOPHY 

Adam.     The  Religious  Teachers  of  Greece,  1908. 

Bevan.     Stoics  and  Sceptics,  1913. 

BoNHOFFER.     Epiktet  und  das  Stoa,  1890. 

Brehier.     Les  idees  phUosophiques  et  religieuses  de  Philon  d^Alex- 

andrie,  1908. 
Caird.     The    Evolution  of  Theology  vn  the  Greek    Philosophers, 

1899. 
Burnet.     Gh-eek  Philosophy,  1914. 
Drummond.     Philo  Judxieus,  1888. 

EucKEN.     Die  Lebensanschauungen  der  grossen  Dertker,''  1907. 
GiRARD.     Le  sentiment  religieux  en  Grece,^  1887. 
Gomperz.     Greek  Thinkers  (Eng.  tr.),  1901-12. 
Pflbiderer.     Vorbereitungen  des  Christentums  in  der  griechischen 

Philosophie,  1906. 
Schmekel.     Die  Philosophie  der  mittleren  Stoa,  1892. 

IV.  ROMAN  RELIGION 

Boissier.     La  religion  romaine  d^Auguste  jusqu^aux  Antonim,* 

189L 
Keim.     Rom  und  das  Christentum,  1881. 
Norden.     Kom)iieiitar  zur  Aeneid  VI.,  1903, 
Warde  Fowler.     The  Religious  Experiences  of  the  Roman  People^ 

1911 ;  Roman  Ideas  of  Deity ^  1914. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  196 

'  V.  ETHICS 

Barbour.     A  Philosophical  Study  of  Christian  Ethics,  1911, 

De  CJoulanges.     La  citS  antique,  1866. 

Farrer.     Paganism  and  Christianity,  1891. 

Friedlander.     Roman  Life  and  Manners  (Eng.  tr.),  1908-13. 

Green.     Prolegomena  to  Ethics,  1883. 

Haering.     The  Christian  Life  (Eng.  tr.),  1907. 

Herrmann.    Ethih,^  1913. 

Kant.     Theory  of  Ethics  (Abbott's  translation),'  1879. 

Kirn.     Grenzfragen  der  Christlichen  Ethik,  1906. 

Lecky.     History  of  European  Morals,^  1890. 

Livingstone.     The  Greek  Genius  and  its  Meaning  to  us,  1912. 

LuTHARDT.     History  of  Christian  Ethics  (Eng  tr.),  1889. 

Martha.     Moralistes  sous  V empire  romain,^  1907. 

Rash  D ALL.     Conscience  and  Christ,  1916. 

Seeberg.    Christlich-protestantische  Ethik  (in  Kultur  der  Gegenwari), 

1909. 
Seeley.    Ecce  Homo,  1866. 
SiDGWicK.     History  of  Ethics,'^  1888. 


VI.  RELIGIONS  OF  INDIA 

(a)  Buddhism 

Anasaki.    Article  on  '  Buddhist  Ethics,'  in  Hastings'  Encyclopctdia 

of  Religion  and  Ethics. 
Bertholet.     Buddhismus  und  Christentum,  1902. 
De  La  Vall^e  Poussin.     Bouddhisme,  1909, 
Falke.     Buddha,  Mohammed,  Christus,^  1900. 
Hackmann.     Buddhism  as  a  Religion  (Eng.  tr.),  1910. 
Lloyd.     The  Creed  of  Half  Japan,  1911. 
Oldenberg.     Buddha,  His  Life,  His  Doctrine,  His  Order  (Eng.  tr.), 

1882. 
Pischel.     Leben  und  Lehre  des  Buddha,  1906. 
Reischauer,     Studies  in  Japanese  Buddhism,  1917. 
Rhys  Davids.     Buddhism  (American  Lectures),  1904. 

(6)  Hinduism 

Farquhar.     The  Croum  of  Hinduism,  1913, 

Geldner.     Die  Religionen  der  Inder,  1911. 

Hopkins.     The  Religions  of  India,  1896. 

Macnicol.     Indian  Theism,  1915. 

MoNiER  Williams.  Brahmanism  and  Hinduism,  1891.  On 
'  Bhukti,'  see  especially  the  article  '  Bhakti-marga  '  (Grierson)  in 
Hastings'  Encyclopcedia  of  Religion  and  Ethics. 


196      ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


VII.  THE  ESSENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

Adams  Brown.     The  Essence  of  Christianity,  1902. 

Caird,  J.     The  Fundamental  Ideas  of  Christianity y  1899. 

Drummond.     Via,  Veritas^  Vita,  1894. 

Gardner.     The  Ch-owth  of  Christianity,  1907, 

Habring.     The  Christian  Faith  (Eng.  tr.),  1913. 

Harnack.     What  it  Christianity?  (Eng.  tr.),  1901. 

Herrmann.     Communion  with  God  (Eng.  tr.),  1906. 

Kaftan.     Das  Wesen  der  christlichen  Religion,^  1888. 

LoiST.     VEvangile  et  VEglise,  1904. 

Mackintosh,  H.  R.     The  Person  of  Jesus  Christ,  1912. 

Orr,     The  Christian  View  of  God  and  the  World,  1893. 

Paterson.     The  Rule  of  Faith,  1912. 

Peake.     Christianity,  its  Nature  and  its  Truth,  1908. 

Rkischlb.     Theologie  und  Religionsgeschichte,  1904. 

Seeberg.      The  Fundamental   Truths   of  Christianity  (Eng.   tr.), 

1908. 
Wernle.     The  Beginnings  of  Christianity  (Eng.  tr.),  1903-4  ;  Ein- 

fuhrung  in  das  theologische  Studium,^  1911. 
WoBBERMiN.     Das  Weseu  des  Christentums,  1905. 


VIII.  THE  FINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION 

Bruce.     Apologetics,  or  Christianity  defensively  stated,  1892. 
Fairbairn.       The      Philosophy      of     the      Christian      Religion, 

1906. 
Foster.     The  Finality  of  the  Christian  Religion,  1906. 
Frommel.       Le    danger      moral      de      Vevolutionisme      religieux, 

1898. 
GiRGENSOHN.     Die  moderne  historische  Denkweise  und  die  Theologie, 

1904. 
Haering.     Die  Lebensfrage  der  systematischen  Theologie,  1895. 
HuNziNGER.     Prohleme  und  Aufgahen  der  gegenwdrtigen  systemati- 
schen Theologie,  1909. 
Johnson.     Some  Alternatives  to  Jesus  Christ,  1914. 
Kaftan.     The    Truth    of    the    Christian    Religion    (Eng.    tr.), 

1894. 
Kirn.      Qlauhe  und  Geschichte,  1900 ;    Grundriss  der  Dogmaiik,* 

1912. 
Knox.     The    Direct    and  Fundamental   Proofs   of  the    Christian 

Religion,  1903. 
Mezqer.     Die  Absolutheit  des  Christentums,  1912. 
ScHULZE.     Grundriss  der  Dogmatik,  1917. 
Troeltsch.     Die  Absolutheit  des  Christentums,^  1912  ;  Gemwmdte 

Schriften^  Bd.  ii.,  1913. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  197 


IX.  GENERAL  WORKS  OF  REFERENCE 

Students  are  referred  to  the  many  relative  articles  in  such 
collections  as  Hastings'  Encyclopcedia  of  Religion  and  Ethics ; 
Daremberg  et  Saglio,  Diet,  des  Antiquites ;  Herzog-Hauck, 
Real- Encyclopddie  ;  The  Jewish  Encyclopcedia ;  Schiele,  Die 
Religion  in  Geschichte  und  Gegenwart ;  The  Encyclopcedia  Brit- 
annica^  11th  edition  ;  Peake's  Commentary  on  the  Bible,  and  the 
Zeitschrift  fur  Theologie  und  Kirche.  Also  to  various  sections  in 
De  la  Saussaye's  Lehrhuch  der  Beligionsgeschichte,  and  Sodkr- 
blom's  edition  (thd  4th)  of  Tials's  Komj^indium  der  Religiont- 
gMehichU, 


INDEX 


I^SUBJECTS 


Absoluteness  of  Christianity,  161 
ff. ;  New  Testament  view  of,  179 ; 
Troeltsch's  discussion  of,  184  ff. 

Amida,  90. 

Apostles'  Creed,  77. 

Asceticism,  102. 

Atonement,  86. 

Autonomy,  moral,  145  f. 

Bhakti,  idea  of,  21,  113. 
Brotherhood.  136,  139  f.,  157. 
Buddhism,  21,  29,  57  ;  trinity  of,  51 ; 

contrast  of,  with  Christianity,  93  f. ; 

ethic  of,  142;   its  religious  ideas, 

166  ff. 

Creation,  idea  of,  58  ff. 

Cross,  medium  of  pardon,  81, 119. 

Deification,  45  ff. 
Demons,  rescue  from,  95  f. 
Dying  and  rising  god,  83  ff. 
Dynamic,    ethical,    of   Christianity, 
141  ff. 

Ecstasy,  103  f. 

Envy,  divine,  42. 

Epicureanism,  123,  151. 

Essence  of  Christianity,  5  f. 

Ethic,    the  Christian,    127   ff. ;    its 

religious  character,  142  ff. 
Evolution,   and  the   absoluteness  of 

Christianity,  186. 

Fate  and  Fatalism,  42  f.,  71  f. 
Fatherhood  of  God,   Christian  view 
198 


of,  88  ff.,  165,  178;    in   ancient 

thought,  73. 
Fear  of  the  world,  121. 
Forgiveness,  of  God,  119;  of  injuries, 

137  f. 
Free  grace,  89. 
Fulness  of  the  times,  16  f. 

God,  Christian  conception  of,  29-57 ; 

as  revealed  in  Jesus,  38  ff. ,  51  ff. 
Grace,  146  f. 
Greek   dramatists,    monotheism    in, 

32  f. 
Greek  philosophy,  12, 15,  37. 

Heqelianism,  175. 

Hinduism,  31,  82  f.,  114. 

History  and  the  Gospel,  56  f.,  73  ff., 

77,  181  ff 
History  of  Religions,  2,  9,  27,  59,  79, 

188. 
Holiness  of  God,  42  f . 

Ideal,  moral,  of  Christianity,  155 1 
Imitation  of  Jesus,  150  ff. 
Immortality,  104  f.,  122  ff. 
Incarnation,  80  ff. 
India,  religions  of,  13,  21.  58,  70  f., 

73ff,  136. 
Individuality,  64  ff.,  117. 
Intellectnalism,  108  ff. 
Itinerant  preachers,  17  f. 

Jesus  Christ,  fixes  meaning  of  Chris- 
tianity, 7;  secret  of  its  renewal, 
25  ;  continually  being  revealed,  26 ; 


INDEX 


199 


His  revelation  of  God,  38  ff. ;  His 
Person  the  distinctive  thing,  76  ff.  ; 
His  self-consciousness,  78  ff.  ;  His 
resurrection,  87  ff. ;  as  the  Son, 
116  f. ;  His  hatred  of  sin,  137  ;  as 
source  of  moral  power,  149  ff. 

Joy,  116. 

Judaism,  influence  of,  15;  contrast 
with  Christianity,  22  ;  monotheism 
of,  34 ;  legalism  of,  98  f. ;  and  mys- 
ticism, 106  f. ;  a  religion  of  hope, 
115. 

Karma,  91. 

Kingdom  of  God,  the  new  order  of 
brotherhood,  92,  146 ;  a  cosmic 
order,  96,  173;  an  eternal  order, 
126,  159  f. 

Legalism,  98  ff.,  130. 

Love,  of  God,  40  ff.  ;  as  a  moral  con- 
ception, 128  f.  ;  organising  idea  of 
Christian  morality,  136  ff. ;  to 
Christ,  163;  in  Buddhism,  167. 


Mediation,  82  ff. 
Men,  conception  of,  61  ff, 
Messiah,  idea  of,  78,  86. 
Missions,  2,  190  f. 
Monotheism,  approach  to,  32  ff. 
Mysteries    and    mysticism,    66,    88, 
102  ff..  125. 


Neoplatonism,  21,  109;  trinity  of, 

31. 
Nirvana,  168,  170, 190. 


Old  Testament,  religion  of,  21  f.  ; 

thought  of  God,  48,  55  ;  forgiveness 

in,  119 ;  redemption  in,  120  ff. 
Oriental  cults,  18,  20,  33,  56  f.,  66, 

143 ;    and  the  Divine  mercy,  41  ; 

mythical  basis  of,  77. 


Original,  all  great  religions  are,  7  f. 
Originality  of  the  Christian  message, 

2  and  passim  ;  primitive  believers 

conscious  of,  10. 

Paganism  not  ethically  barren,  12. 

Pauline  ethic,  128. 

Pauline  gospel,  98  f.,  107,  115. 

Penitence,  110  f. 

Personality  of  God  in  paganism,  34  ff. 

Pessimism,  70,  115. 

Pharisaism,  54,  90,  99, 129,  131.  138. 

Power,  of  God,  43  ff. 

Preparatio  Evangelica,  11 1 

Prophets  of  Israel,  74. 

Providence,  67  ff. 

Recurrence,  doctrine  of  Eternal,  72. 
Redemption,  experience  of,   93  ff. ; 

pathway  to,  98  ff. ;  in  Buddhism, 

169  ff. 
Reserves,  moral,  of  Christianity,  158. 
Resurrection,  87  fL 
Revelation,  73  ff. 
Rome,  religion  of,  20. 

Servant  of  the  Lord,  85  f. 

Sin,  63,  110. 

Sonship,  116  ff.,  178. 

Spirit  of  God,  inspires  sonship,  118 
and  love,  139  ;  in  St.  Paul's  ethic 
148  f.  ;  guides  into  truth,  162  f. 

State  religions,  15. 

Stoicism,  teaching  on  God,  33, 36  f . ,  41 ; 
thought  of  man,  61 ;  of  Providence, 
68  ff. ;  legalism  of,  100  f.  ;  lack  of 
sonship,  117  f.  ;  lack  of  pardon, 
119 ;  thought  of  immortality,  123 ; 
inwardness  of,  132;  its  ethic,  132  ff., 
140. 

Syncretism,  14,  18  f.,  94. 

Theism  in  Plato,  83  ff. 
Theocrasia,  33. 
Transcendence,  55. 
Trinity,  doctrine  of,  29  ff. 


200       ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


Union  with  God,  114. 

Validitt,  4. 
Vicarious  suffering,  134. 


Woman,    in    Christianity,  67,  113, 

140. 
Worid,  redemption  from  the,  97. 

Zoroastrianism,  21,  73, 121 


n— AUTHORS 


Adah,  61, 149. 

Allworthy,  140. 

Angus,  16,  163. 

Apuleius,  69. 

Aristotle,  36,  40,  64,  72,  122,  135. 

Arnold,  Matthew,  28,  116. 

Augustine,  80,  132. 

Baur,  12. 
Ben  Sira,  50,  130. 
Bevan,  72,  128,  138. 
Boissier,  101. 
Bonhoffer,  123. 
Bousset,  49,  106. 
Brooks,  153. 
Burke,  2. 
Burnet,  35. 

Caird,  64, 185. 
Cairns,  10,  96,  191. 
Campbell  Gibson,  168. 
Cariyle,  120. 
Carneades,  36. 
Charies,  48,  137. 
Cicero,  36,  100,  105. 
aeanthes,  36,  43. 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  12. 
Coleridge,  6. 

*  Concerning  Prayer,'  111. 
Cumont,  45,  67. 

Davidson,  56. 
Denney,  79, 160. 
DUl,  134, 168. 
Dobschiitz,  115. 


Epictbtus, 
133, 134. 


37,  44, 62,  68,  71, 132, 


Farquhar,  141. 
Farrer,  13,  68, 122,  138. 
Figgis,  156. 

Garbe,  19. 

Gardner,  86, 

Glover,  18,  29,  53,  64,  95,  91 

Goethe,  7. 

Green,  T.  H.,  156. 

Gunkel,  9,  69. 

Hackmann,  169,  172. 
Hamilton,  32,  43. 
Harnack,  5,  21,  97. 
Hatch,  34,  145. 

W.  H.  P.,  112, 

Hausrath,  63. 
Heinrici,  23. 
Hesiod,  59,  166. 
,  138. 


James,  165. 
Jowett,  4,  60. 
Jiilicher,  120. 
Justin  Martyr,  12,  160. 
Juvenal,  103. 

Kant,  135,  143. 

Kennedy,  H.  A.  A.,  61,  69,  84, 107. 

Lacey,  182. 
Lloyd,  90. 
Loisy,  6. 

McDOUOALL,  91. 
Maciver,  17. 


INDEX 


201 


Macnicol,  21,  186. 

Marcion,  75. 

Marcus  Aurelius,  69,  72,  138,  149. 

Maximus  of  Tyre,  69. 

Mellone,  127. 

Montefiore,  51,  89,  135, 168. 

Moore,  65,  122. 

Morgan,  84. 

Muirhead,  85. 

Murray,  71. 

NiBTZSCHR,  9L 

Oldbnbero,  167. 
Oldham,  2. 
Oman,  147. 
Orchard,  190. 
Origen,  15, 132. 

Pater,  34. 

Pfleiderer,  25. 

Philo,  22,  50,  69,  121. 

Pindar,  60. 

Plato,  12,  17,  33,  40,  42,  60,  64,  74, 

122,  131,  139. 
Posidonius,  36,  71,  123. 
Preisker,  129. 
Pringle-Pattison,  7, 45. 

Rashdall,  151. 
Reville,  73. 
Ritschl,  22,  70. 
Rohde,  40,  106. 


Saunders,  167,  172. 

Schleiermacher,  24,  125,  181.  Xenophon,  84. 

Schweitzer,  84. 

Scott,  10,  23,  163,  180.  Zeno,  36. 


Seeley,  188. 

Seneca,  36,  37,  40,  68,  69,  71,  101, 

123,  132,  133,  147,  151. 
Simmel,  60. 
Smith,  SirG.  A.,  146. 
Socrates,  70. 
Soderblom,  31,  119. 
Sorley,  49,  106. 
Spinoza,  40. 
Steinmann,  124. 
Stephan,  13. 
Strachan,  13. 
Strauss,  182. 
Streeter,  80. 

Taylor,  35,  45, 

Tertullian,  12. 

Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Pairiarehs, 

138. 
Tibullus,  123. 
Titius,  55. 
Troeltsch,  173,  179,  181. 

ViROiL,  15,  46f.,63,  66. 

Warde  Fowler,  20,  36. 
Webb,  40.  41,  46,  62. 
Weinel,  135. 
Wendland,  P.,  16. 
Westcott,  31. 
Whitaker,  185. 
Wicks,  48,  50. 
Wisdom,  50. 
Wood,  108. 


III.— BIBLICAL  REFERENCES 


Old  Testament 


Leviticus  19  ",  137. 
Ps.  23,  65. 


Isa.  1 1617,  43  ;  40  «»  44 ;  58,  52, 134. 
Amos  3  ^  43. 


202        ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


Nbw  Tbstambnt 

Matth«w   5**,  131,  138;    11 »    47;  :  1  Corinthians    2«,    24;   11 «    85; 

11 «    39,  179;  13 1«-",  76;  1623,  |      14^  66. 

52;  17  2«,  141 ;  22*o,  128.  i  2  Corinthiang  5",  6,  81 ;  10 »,  136; 

Mark  8  w.  135 ;  8  »7,  66.  12  'o,  100. 

Luke  10*7, 168  ;  12»»,  116  ;  15  w,  55.  I  Galatians  5",  128. 
Jolm  19,  12;  3«    169;  10".   170;    Ephesians   2i8,   30;  8»     129;  4", 


11  w,   115;    13«*,    128;    14 1,    81; 

17 S  155. 
Acts    1095,    4;    17  M,     12;     17  88-31, 

23  f . 
Romans    1*.    171;    2"     128;  5^, 

179;  7»,  109;  16"S18«. 


139;  5 18,  107. 
Philippians  4*,  107;  2««-,  136. 
1  Thessalonians  2i»,  18. 
1  Peter  121,  6. 
1  John  1»,  6;  1»,  87;  3»,  168;  4W, 

129. 


Date  Due 


«».. 


fewry? 


pmmsmsm^. 


^^^ 


I 


u 


tvUVV 


^»P-       ''" 


TF^' 


^^ 


i^simff 


tAOU..J  > 


/^^ 


ujmm 


